Non-Contact Intracardiac Potential Mapping Using Mesh-Based and Meshless Inverse Solvers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac dysrhythmia and percutaneous catheter ablation is widely used to treat it. Panoramic mapping with multi-electrode catheters has been used to identify ablation targets in persistent AF but is limited by poor contact and inadequate coverage of the left atrial cavity. In this paper, we investigate the accuracy with which atrial endocardial surface potentials can be reconstructed from electrograms recorded with non-contact catheters. An in-silico approach was employed in which “ground-truth” surface potentials from experimental contact mapping studies and computer models were compared with inverse potential maps constructed by sampling the corresponding intracardiac field using virtual basket catheters. We demonstrate that it is possible to 1) specify the mixed boundary conditions required for mesh-based formulations of the potential inverse problem fully, and 2) reconstruct accurate inverse potential maps from recordings made with appropriately designed catheters. Accuracy improved when catheter dimensions were increased but was relatively stable when the catheter occupied >30% of atrial cavity volume. Independent of this, the capacity of non-contact catheters to resolve the complex atrial potential fields seen in reentrant atrial arrhythmia depended on the spatial distribution of electrodes on the surface bounding the catheter. Finally, we have shown that reliable inverse potential mapping is possible in near real-time with meshless methods that use the Method of Fundamental Solutions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".