Heart Rate Monitoring Using PPG With Smartphone Camera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods of estimating heart rate without the use of sensor devices provides essential benefits in both the medical field as well as the other computing applications. Smartphones are the handiest devices available to everyone today. By using videos of fingertip captured with smartphone camera, heart rate (HR) can be estimated using the photoplethysmography (PPG) technique. It is based on tracking subtle color changes on the skin owing to cardiovascular activities. These color changes are invisible to the human eye but can be detected by digital cameras. The method is divided into three main steps: first, reading the video frames and processing them to obtain the PPG data, next, extracting the Blood Volume Pulse (BVP) signal, and finally, estimating the HR from the signal. In this project, the color intensity of the skin pixels is used, and filters are applied to eliminate the noise and retain only the pulses of interest. The extracted signal is fed into a convolutional regression neural network which outputs the estimated HR. The results obtained are compared with the ground truth HR obtained by using a contact PPG sensor. We obtained a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 7.01 beats per minute (bpm) and an error percentage of 8.3% on test data.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".