MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411792842 · doi:10.18280/ts.420333

Cross-Interval Continuous Unification Model for Abnormal Heart Rhythm Detection Using ECG Signals

2025· article· en· W4411792842 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rajeshwaran Kandhasamy, Gurumoorthy Kambatty Bojan

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnificationRhythmInterval (graph theory)Heart RhythmCardiologyInternal medicinePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionMathematicsMedicineCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrocardiogram (ECG) signals observed from wearable sensing devices follow a cyclic and continuous pattern for detecting heart-related diseases.Signal processing for medical psychological vital observation identifies the random or irregular rhythms guided by machine learning and artificial intelligence techniques.In this article, a Cross-Interval Continuous Unification Model (CICUM) is introduced to identify such irregular rhythms in continuous observation intervals.This model is backboned by a two-layer neural network for continuity verification and signal correlation.The first layer is used to identify discontinuous sequences between fixed signal sensing intervals.The second layer is responsible for correlating the peak and lower-order signal pulses with the normal and abnormal ECG training inputs.In the first layer, the continuous time interval metric is used to identify discontinuities that are converged using identified signal iterations.In the second layer, the variations between high and low pulses are used to train the neural network for precise abnormal signal detection.Therefore, the proposed model unifies cross intervals and signal correlations between abnormal and normal sequences to detect heart-related diseases from irregular psychological signals.The CICU improves the sequence classification, detection accuracy, and continuity verification by 14.71%, 8.91%, and 11.82% respectively for the maximum sequences.

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 score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207