PPG2ABP: Translating Photoplethysmogram (PPG) Signals to Arterial Blood Pressure (ABP) Waveforms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases are one of the most severe causes of mortality, annually taking a heavy toll on lives worldwide. Continuous monitoring of blood pressure seems to be the most viable option, but this demands an invasive process, introducing several layers of complexities and reliability concerns due to non-invasive techniques not being accurate. This motivates us to develop a method to estimate the continuous arterial blood pressure (ABP) waveform through a non-invasive approach using Photoplethysmogram (PPG) signals. We explore the advantage of deep learning, as it would free us from sticking to ideally shaped PPG signals only by making handcrafted feature computation irrelevant, which is a shortcoming of the existing approaches. Thus, we present PPG2ABP, a two-stage cascaded deep learning-based method that manages to estimate the continuous ABP waveform from the input PPG signal with a mean absolute error of 4.604 mmHg, preserving the shape, magnitude, and phase in unison. However, the more astounding success of PPG2ABP turns out to be that the computed values of Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP), Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) from the estimated ABP waveform outperform the existing works under several metrics (mean absolute error of 3.449 ± 6.147 mmHg, 2.310 ± 4.437 mmHg, and 5.727 ± 9.162 mmHg, respectively), despite that PPG2ABP is not explicitly trained to do so. Notably, both for DBP and MAP, we achieve Grade A in the BHS (British Hypertension Society) Standard and satisfy the AAMI (Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation) standard.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".