Cardiopulmonary coupling analysis using smart wearables and mobile computing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cardiopulmonary coupling (CPC) analysis links heart and respiration rates to assess sleep-related parameters. Typically, the CPC is measured using multi-lead electrocardiography (ECG) and ECG-derived respiration (EDR). Novel textile shirts with embedded ECG sensors offer convenient and continuously monitored sleep at home. We investigate the feasibility of a shirt with textile sensors (Pro- Kit, Hexoskin, Quebec, Canada) for CPC analysis by mobile computing. ECG data is continuously transmitted from the shirt to a smartphone via Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE). We customize a CPC algorithm and use twelve whole-night recordings from four volunteers to perform qualitative and quantitative analysis. We compare EDR with respiratory inductive plethysmography (RIP). In average, EDR and RIP differ 17.22%. After one night, the batteries are reduced to approx. 70% (shirt) and 90% (smartphone). The run time for CPC processing is approx. 3 min. Hence, smart wearables in combination with mobile computing show technical feasibility for CPC analysis. Eventually, this could yield a useful solution for sleep analysis of non-expert users in a private environment.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".