MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205669528 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3138976

Deep Learning Models for Magnetic Cardiography Edge Sensors Implementing Noise Processing and Diagnostics

2021· article· en· W4205669528 on OpenAlexaff
Sadman Sakib, Mostafa M. Fouda, Muftah Al‐Mahdawi, Attayeb Mohsen, Mikihiko Oogane, Yasuo Ando, Zubair Md. Fadlullah

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityThunder Bay Regional Research Institute
FundersTohoku UniversityQatar National Research FundMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryFonds National de la Recherche LuxembourgQatar Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceDeep learningArtificial intelligenceNoise (video)Edge computingPipeline (software)Noise reductionMachine learningEdge deviceReal-time computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remote health monitoring has become a necessity due to reduced healthcare access resulting from pandemic lockdowns and the increasing aging population. Electrocardiography (ECG) is the standard for cardiac monitoring and arrhythmia identification, but it is inconvenient for long-time remote monitoring. Recently, Magnetocardiography (MCG) sensors that operate at room temperature became available based on spintronic sensors. However, MCG analysis is affected by the low-frequency noise present at the sensors. In this paper, we present an artificial intelligence (AI)-aided multi-model pipeline combining two AI architectures, defined as model-M1 and model-M2, targeted for ultra-edge Internet of Things (IoT) sensors to simulate arrhythmia detection. Model-M1 is a denoising preprocessor based on a sliding-window assisted deep-learning (DL) model. We investigate various methods to achieve high accuracy with lightweight computation. Model-M2 is a lightweight DL model that analyzes denoised ECG output from model-M1 to identify arrhythmia. We use multiple publicly available clinically annotated datasets to evaluate our proposal. We find that denoising by model-M1 retains the features, which assist the model-M2 in achieving high classification accuracy, compared to using a conventional moving average filter. This AI pipeline architecture is promising for privacy-preserving ultra-edge medical sensing devices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207