MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Age Classification Based on ECG QRS Wave Using Deep Learning

2022· article· en· W4297786984 on OpenAlexafffund
Azfar Adib, Wei‐Ping Zhu, M. Omair Ahmad

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Energy Technologies (ICECET) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQRS complexArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)ElectrocardiographyEstimatorBiometricsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionMedicineMathematicsStatisticsCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrocardiogram (ECG) signal, which represents electrical activity of human heart, is recently emerging as a secured biometric scheme. Some prior studies have found ECG as an estimator of cardiac age (indicating heart condition). Estimating chronological age from ECG can facilitate anonymous age verification. With that objective, we analyzed ECG records of 4SS4 subjects obtained from PTB-XL database (a large public dataset of 12-lead ECG). In our experimental dataset, 48% subjects were male and 52% were female, 56% were healthy subjects and 44% had some cardiac abnormalities. 1000 samples from each record were first passed through a band-pass filter, followed by discrete wavelet decomposition up to 4th level and reconstruction through the approximation coefficients (using sym-4 mother wavelet). The purpose was to obtain the QRS wave, a low frequency component of the ECG signal, which is considered as a good indicator of chronological age. This processed signal was then used for age classification using a deep neural network model; which consisted of 3 consequent layers of ID CNN, batch-normalization, max-pooling; LSTM layer, fully connected layers and a regression model for classification. 6 different age segments were used as classification labels (0-17 years, 18-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years, 50-59 years and 60-69 years). As the result show, classification accuracy did not vary significantly between all subjects and healthy subjects, while experimenting with all age segments. However, accuracy significantly improved and showed less fluctuation while experimenting with discontinuous age segments. This indicates better effectiveness of ECG-based age segmentation for discontinuous age groups. Importantly, our proposed method achieved significantly lower MAE (mean absolute error) in comparison with other methods available in literature.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Energy Technologies (ICECET)Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207