Automated Cough Analysis with Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic cough is associated with several respiratory diseases and is a significant burden on physical, social, and psychological health. Non-invasive, real-time, continuous, and quantitative monitoring tools are highly desired to assess cough severity, the effectiveness of treatment, and monitor disease progression in clinical practice and research. There are currently limited tools to quantitatively measure spontaneous coughs in daily living settings in clinical trials and in clinical practice. In this study, we developed a machine learning model for the detection and classification of cough sounds. Mel spectrograms are utilized as a key feature representation to capture the temporal and spectral characteristics of coughs. We applied this approach to automate cough analysis using 300 h of audio recordings from cough challenge clinical studies conducted in a clinical lab setting. A number of machine learning algorithms were studied and compared, including decision tree, support vector machine, k-nearest neighbors, logistic regression, random forest, and neural network. We identified that for this dataset, the CRNN approach is the most effective method, reaching 98% accuracy in identifying individual coughs from the audio data. These findings provide insights into the strengths and limitations of various algorithms, highlighting the potential of CRNNs in analyzing complex cough patterns. This research demonstrates the potential of neural network models in fully automated cough monitoring. The approach requires validation in detecting spontaneous coughs in patients with refractory chronic cough in a real-life setting.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".