Neonatal Face Tracking for Non-Contact Continuous Patient Monitoring
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noncontact video-based patient monitoring promises several advantages over wearable sensors, particularly for patients in the NICU who have fragile skin. However, such approaches often require definition of a region-of-interest (ROI), such as the patient’s forehead. For example, a number of neonatal monitoring studies have estimated heart rate and respiration from video by first manually cropping the face of the patient before performing analyses within that region. Relying on a static ROI can fail due to patient motion or during clinical interventions, thereby demanding additional manual ROI selection over the course of the monitoring period. Widely used face detection algorithms tend to fail in a neonatal context. We therefore propose a semi-automated method where the ROI is automatically and repeatedly reinitialized to ensure robustness of the ROI for continuous monitoring. Factors such as the displacement of the patient and the change in patient poses are addressed using multiple computer vision techniques before selecting a comprehensive method for ROI tracking. Results were obtained from three patients admitted at the NICU using 20-minute videos including periods of rest, motion, and occlusion events. Compared to a static ROI, the proposed method achieves significantly improved tracking of the patient’s face, as demonstrated by an area under the curve > 0.63 across all patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it