MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242246629 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2006.4398327

Optical Mapping System for Visualizing Arrhythmias in Isolated Mouse Atria

2006· article· en· W4242246629 on OpenAlexaff
Robyn Schmidt, Anders Nygren

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical mappingElectrophysiologyPixelCardiac electrophysiologyNoise (video)Optical recordingCardiologySIGNAL (programming language)Internal medicineComputer scienceMedicineArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical mapping has become an important technique in the study of cardiac electrophysiology, especially in terms of investigating the mechanisms of cardiac arrhythmias. The increasing availability of transgenic mice as models for cardiovascular disease is driving the need for instrumentation suitable for the study of electrical activity in the mouse heart. In this paper we evaluate our optical mapping system's ability to clearly record induced arrhythmic activity in an isolated mouse atrial preparation. Preliminary results indicate that the signal quality is high enough that individual optically recorded action potentials can be discerned in many pixels, even without post-processing for noise removal. The optical mapping video is clear enough for general observations regarding the patterns of electrical propagation during arrhythmic behaviour. The induced arrhythmias appear to have a regular pattern of activity, and are likely best classified as atrial tachycardias.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference proceedingsSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207