MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240712688 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14657064

Discriminative sparse coding in the analysis of electrocardiogram during ventricular arrhythmias

2021· preprint· en· W4240712688 on OpenAlexaffabout
Iman Kalaji

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVentricular fibrillationDiscriminative modelVentricular tachycardiaCardiologyInternal medicineMedicineSudden cardiac deathFibrillationAtrial fibrillationPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abnormalities in the rhythmic electromechanical contractions of the heart results in cardiac arrhythmias. When these abnormalities rise from the ventricles of the heart, they are classified as ventricular arrhythmias. The two major types of ventricular arrhythmias are ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF). Ventricular fibrillation is the most dangerous among the two arrhythmias, that usually leads to sudden cardiac death if not treated immediately. Annually about 40,000 sudden cardiac deaths are reported in Canada. Due to high mortality rate and serious impact on quality of life, researchers have been focusing on characterizing ventricular arrhythmias that may lead to delivering optimized treatment options in improving the survival rates. In this thesis two major types of ventricular arrhythmias were analyzed and quantified by performing discriminative sparse coding analysis called label consistent K-SVD using time frequency dictionaries that are well localized in time and frequency domains. The analyzed signals were 670 ECG ventricular arrhythmia segments from 33 patients extracted from the Malignant Ventricular Ectopy and Creighton University Tachy-Arrhythmia databases. Using the LCKSVD dictionary learning approach, an overall maximum classification accuracy of 73.3% was achieved with a hybrid optimized wavelet dictionary. Based on the comparative analysis, the trained (learned) dictionaries yielded better performance than the untrained dictionaries. The results indicate that discriminative sparse coding approach has greater potential in extracting signal adaptive and morphologically discriminative time-frequency structures in studying ventricular arrhythmias.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207