MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal filter characterization for photoplethysmography-based pulse rate and pulse power spectrum estimation

2020· article· en· W3082032578 on OpenAlexaff
Raymundo Cassani, Abhishek Tiwari, Tiago H. Falk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramPulse (music)Computer scienceBand-pass filterFilter (signal processing)SIGNAL (programming language)Signal processingSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Artificial intelligenceBiomedical engineeringElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsMedicineComputer visionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photoplethysmography (PPG) is a non-invasive, low-cost optical technique used to assess the cardiovascular system. In recent years, PPG-based heart rate measurement has gained significant attention due to its popularity in wearable devices, as well as its practicality relative to electrocardiography (ECG). Studies comparing the dynamics of ECG- and PPG-based heart rate measures have found small differences between these two modalities; differences related to the physiological processes behind each technique. In this work, we analyzed the spectral coherence and the signal-to-noise ratio between isolated PPG pulses and the raw PPG signal in order to: (i) determine the optimal filter to enhance pulse detection from raw PPG for improved heart rate estimation, and (ii) characterize the spectral content of the PPG pulse. The proposed methods were evaluated on 27000 pulses from a PPG database acquired from 42 participants (adults and children). The results showed that the optimal bandpass filter to enhance PPG from the adult group was 0.6-3.3 Hz, while for the children group it was 1.0-2.7 Hz. The spectral analysis on the pulse signal showed that similar bandwidths were found for the adult (0.8-2.4 Hz) and children (0.9-2.7 Hz) groups. We hope that the results presented herein serve as a baseline for pulse detection algorithms and assist with the development of more sophisticated PPG processing algorithms.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207