Detecting Coronary Artery Disease Using Rest Seismocardiography and Gyrocardiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we present a non-invasive solution to identify patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) defined as ⩾50% stenosis in at least one coronary artery. The solution is based on the analysis of linear acceleration (seismocardiogram, SCG) and angular velocity (gyrocardiogram, GCG) of the heart recorded in the x, y, and z directional axes from an accelerometer/gyroscope sensor mounted on the sternum. The database was collected from 310 individuals through a multicenter study. The time-frequency features extracted from each SCG and GCG data channel were fed to a one-dimensional Convolutional Neural Network (1D CNN) to train six separate classifiers. The results from different classifiers were later fused to estimate the CAD risk for each participant. The predicted CAD risk was validated against related results from angiography. The SCG z and SCG y classifiers showed better performance relative to the other models ( p < 0.05) with the area under the curve (AUC) of 91%. The sensitivity range for CAD detection was 92–94% for the SCG models and 73–87% for the GCG models. Based on our findings, the SCG models achieved better performance in predicting the CAD risk compared to the GCG models; the model based on the combination of all SCG and GCG classifiers did not achieve higher performance relative to the other models. Moreover, these findings showed that the performance of the proposed 3-axial SCG/GCG solution based on recordings obtained during rest was comparable, or better than stress ECG. These data may indicate that 3-axial SCG/GCG could be used as a portable at-home CAD screening tool.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".