Simultaneous data assimilation and cardiac electrophysiology model correction using differentiable physics and deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modelling complex systems, like the human heart, has made great progress over the last decades. Patient-specific models, called ‘digital twins’, can aid in diagnosing arrhythmias and personalizing treatments. However, building highly accurate predictive heart models requires a delicate balance between mathematical complexity, parameterization from measurements and validation of predictions. Cardiac electrophysiology (EP) models range from complex biophysical models to simplified phenomenological models. Complex models are accurate but computationally intensive and challenging to parameterize, while simplified models are computationally efficient but less realistic. In this paper, we propose a hybrid approach by leveraging deep learning to complete a simplified cardiac model from data. Our novel framework has two components, decomposing the dynamics into a physics based and a data-driven term. This construction allows our framework to learn from data of different complexity, while simultaneously estimating model parameters. First, using in silico data, we demonstrate that this framework can reproduce the complex dynamics of cardiac transmembrane potential even in the presence of noise in the data. Second, using ex vivo optical data of action potentials (APs), we demonstrate that our framework can identify key physical parameters for anatomical zones with different electrical properties, as well as to reproduce the AP wave characteristics obtained from various pacing locations. Our physics-based data-driven approach may improve cardiac EP modelling by providing a robust biophysical tool for predictions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".