Swallowing Assessment using High-Resolution Cervical Auscultations and Transformer-based Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Swallowing assessment is a crucial task to reveal swallowing abnormalities. There are multiple modalities to analyze swallowing kinematics, such as videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS), which is the gold standard method, and high-resolution cervical auscultation (HRCA), which is a noninvasive technique that uses a triaxial accelerometer attached to the patient's neck. Deep learning models play an essential role in data driven analysis of swallowing landmarks using VFSS and/or HRCA as input data. Most of these models utilize convolutional and recurrent neural networks. Here, we investigate the ability of transformers to analyze swallowing kinematics; specifically upper esophageal sphincter opening and laryngeal vestibule closure using HRCA signals. We tested the model using an independent test dataset to assess the generalizability of the proposed network. The proposed network achieved an average detection accuracy higher than 90% and 85% for both segmentation tasks, which outperform the hybrid neural networks from the literature, and the model obtained high-performance measures for the independent dataset, showing the transformers' ability to generalize on unseen data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".