MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281703337 · doi:10.1088/1361-6579/ac77d1

Arrhythmia classification of 12-lead and reduced-lead electrocardiograms via recurrent networks, scattering, and phase harmonic correlation

2022· article· en· W4281703337 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Warrick, Vincent Lostanlen, Michael Eickenberg, Masun Nabhan Homsi, Joakim Andén

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Measurement · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsMatthews correlation coefficientLead (geology)CorrelationClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningScatteringComputer scienceAlgorithmSupport vector machineMathematicsPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an automatic classifier of arrhythmias based on 12-lead and reduced-lead electrocardiograms. Our classifier comprises four modules: scattering transform (ST), phase harmonic correlation (PHC), depthwise separable convolutions (DSC), and a long short-term memory (LSTM) network. It is trained on PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge 2021 data. The ST captures short-term temporal ECG modulations while the PHC characterizes the phase dependence of coherent ECG components. Both reduce the sampling rate to a few samples per typical heart beat. We pass the output of the ST and PHC to a depthwise-separable convolution layer (DSC) which combines lead responses separately for each ST or PHC coefficient and then combines resulting values across all coefficients. At a deeper level, two LSTM layers integrate local variations of the input over long time scales. We train in an end-to-end fashion as a multilabel classification problem with a normal and 25 arrhythmia classes. Lastly, we use canonical correlation analysis (CCA) for transfer learning from 12-lead ST and PHC representations to reduced-lead ones. After local cross-validation on the public data from the challenge, our team 'BitScattered' achieved the following results: 0.682 ± 0.0095 for 12-lead; 0.666 ± 0.0257 for 6-lead; 0.674 ± 0.0185 for 4-lead; 0.661 ± 0.0098 for 3-lead; and 0.662 ± 0.0151 for 2-lead.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological MeasurementSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207