MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093740639 · doi:10.22489/cinc.2020.128

Multilabel 12-Lead Electrocardiogram Classification Using Gradient Boosting Tree Ensemble

2020· preprint· en· W3093740639 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander William Wong, Weijie Sun, Sunil V. Kalmady, Padma Kaul, Abram Hindle

Bibliographic record

VenueComputing in cardiology · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGradient boostingBoosting (machine learning)Random forestArtificial intelligenceDecision treePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceTest setEnsemble forecastingWaveformTree (set theory)Set (abstract data type)Feature (linguistics)Ensemble learningMachine learningData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is a commonly used tool for detecting cardiac abnormalities such as atrial fibrillation, blocks, and irregular complexes.For the Phy-sioNet/CinC 2020 Challenge, we built an algorithm using gradient boosted tree ensembles fitted on morphology and signal processing features to classify ECG diagnosis.For each lead, we derive features from heart rate variability, PQRST template shape, and the full signal waveform.We join the features of all 12 leads to fit an ensemble of gradient boosting decision trees to predict probabilities of ECG instances belonging to each class.We train a phase one set of feature importance determining models to isolate the top 1,000 most important features to use in our phase two diagnosis prediction models.We use repeated random sub-sampling by splitting our dataset of 43,101 records into 100 independent runs of 85:15 training/validation splits for our internal evaluation results.Our methodology generates us an official phase validation set score of 0.476 and test set score of -0.080 under the team name, CVC, placing us 36 out of 41 in the rankings.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputing in cardiologySame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207