The Automatic Oxygen Saturation Control System by Adaptive Learning Controller for COVID-19 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes an adaptive learning control and monitoring of oxygen for patients with breathing complexities and respiratory diseases. By recording the oxygen saturation levels in real-time, this system uses an adaptive learning controller (ALC) to vary the oxygen delivered to the patient and maintains it in an optimum range. In the presented approach, the PID controller gain is tuned with the learning technique to provide improved response time and a proactive approach to oxygen control for the patient. A case study is performed by monitoring the time varying health vitals across different age groups to gain a better understanding of the relationship between these parameters for COVID-19 patients. This information is then used to improve the standard of care provided to patients and reducing the time to recovery. Results show that ALC controls the oxygen saturation within the target range of 90% to 94% SpO2, 77% and 80.1% of the time in patients of age groups 40-50 years old and 50-60 years old, respectively. It also had faster time to recovery to target SpO2 range when the concentration dropped rapidly or when the patient becomes hypoxic as compared to the manual control of the oxygen saturation by the healthcare staff.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".