MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386070806 · doi:10.11159/icbes223.121

Qualitative assessment of myocardial gray zone in LGE-CMR imaging

2023· article· en· W4386070806 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Narciso, A Ferreira, Pedro Vieira

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGray (unit)Computer scienceNuclear magnetic resonanceMaterials scienceNuclear medicinePhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our ongoing research is centered on developing patient-customized computational heart models to study arrhythmia mechanisms and risk assessment.The long-term goal is improving patient selection for a cardio-defibrillator implantation.This device is necessary when the normal pattern of electrical propagation is disrupted in a way that causes the heart rhythm to be so disorganized that the pumping function is compromised.This type of arrhythmia is named fibrillation and can only be stopped by an immediate intervention, if not, the brain irrigation is intercepted resulting in sudden cardiac death.Our approach to assessing if an individual is at risk of going through this event is to study the electrical propagation on their own heart using a parallel model.In the present article, we propose a novel method to add a qualitative rating to scarred myocardium.A left ventricle computational model is built, based on an anonymized cardiac magnetic resonance data set with visible scars.The scarred areas are identified and divided into the scar's core, made of dead cells where the conductivity is null, and the heterogeneous or gray zones where different levels of fibrosis coexist, forming both viable and nonviable paths for the depolarization wave.After this major segmentation, the gray zones are split into subsets and the conductivities are computed according to the intensity of the pixels.The number of subsets can be set between two and five.In this work, we are considering two scenarios: with one gray zone level and two.Resulting in two possible patterns the depolarization signal can obey.Electrophysiological simulations are performed for each scenario using the open-source software CHASTE (Cancer, Heart, and Soft Tissue Environment).The results of this phase are used to analyze how the depolarization patterns behave according to the granularity degree set for the gray zones.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207