MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280614476 · doi:10.18280/ria.360205

ECG Pattern Recognition Technique for Atrial Fibrillation Detection

2022· article· en· W4280614476 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lazhar Khriji

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSultan Qaboos University
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Atrial fibrillationSinoatrial nodeComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceFeature extractionFeature (linguistics)Sinus rhythmElectrocardiographySIGNAL (programming language)TachycardiaCardiologyInternal medicineMedicineHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is the most common pathologic of sinus tachycardia, which is the result of an increased rate of depolarization in the sinoatrial node (the sinoatrial node discharges electrical impulses at a higher frequency than normal). In this light, its detection at an early stage is essential for treatments prescription. In this context, we propose an artificial neural network (ANN) architecture using ECG patterns to perform the AF detection. ECG signals are classified into three classes (Normal Sinus Rhythm, abnormal signal with AF, and noisy ECG signals). The proposed technique has been implemented on two types of databases (MIT-BIH database and processed MIT-BIH) using two different experiments. Data segments of 10 seconds length have been used. The achieved experimental results proved that the proposed ANN technique has excellent accuracy results without the need for feature extraction to reduce information parameters. Our work has surpassed the state of the art in terms of specificity, precision, and accuracy. Therefore, we enable clinicians to detect automatically the patients with AF disease.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207