MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365601120 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.06427

In-Distribution and Out-of-Distribution Self-supervised ECG Representation Learning for Arrhythmia Detection

2023· preprint· en· W4365601120 on OpenAlexafffund
Sahar Soltanieh, Javad Hashemi, Ali Etemad

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)Machine learningSet (abstract data type)Training setPattern recognition (psychology)Feature learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a systematic investigation into the effectiveness of Self-Supervised Learning (SSL) methods for Electrocardiogram (ECG) arrhythmia detection. We begin by conducting a novel analysis of the data distributions on three popular ECG-based arrhythmia datasets: PTB-XL, Chapman, and Ribeiro. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to quantitatively explore and characterize these distributions in the area. We then perform a comprehensive set of experiments using different augmentations and parameters to evaluate the effectiveness of various SSL methods, namely SimCRL, BYOL, and SwAV, for ECG representation learning, where we observe the best performance achieved by SwAV. Furthermore, our analysis shows that SSL methods achieve highly competitive results to those achieved by supervised state-of-the-art methods. To further assess the performance of these methods on both In-Distribution (ID) and Out-of-Distribution (OOD) ECG data, we conduct cross-dataset training and testing experiments. Our comprehensive experiments show almost identical results when comparing ID and OOD schemes, indicating that SSL techniques can learn highly effective representations that generalize well across different OOD datasets. This finding can have major implications for ECG-based arrhythmia detection. Lastly, to further analyze our results, we perform detailed per-disease studies on the performance of the SSL methods on the three datasets.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207