MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414776553 · doi:10.3390/s25196097

Cardiac Monitoring with Textile Capacitive Electrodes in Driving Applications: Characterization of Signal Quality and RR Duration Accuracy

2025· article· en· W4414776553 on OpenAlexafffund
James Elber Duverger, Geordi-Gabriel Renaud Dumoulin, Victor Bellemin, Patricia Forcier, Justine Decaens, Ghyslain Gagnon, Alireza Saïdi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à MontréalCTT Group (Canada)Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
FundersMitacsInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsCapacitive sensingSIGNAL (programming language)ElectrodeElectronic circuitTextileAlertnessQuality (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capacitive ECG sensors in automobiles enable unobtrusive heart rate monitoring as an indicator of a driver's alertness and health. This paper introduces a capacitive sensor with textile electrodes and provides insights into signal quality and RR duration accuracy. Electrodes of various shapes, sizes, and fabrics were integrated at various positions into the seat back of a driving simulator car seat. Seven subjects completed identical driving circuits with their cardiac signals being recorded simultaneously with textile electrodes and reference Ag-AgCl electrodes. Capacitive ECG signals with observable R peaks (after filtering) could be captured with almost all pairs of textile electrodes, independently of design or placement. Signal quality from textile electrodes was consistently lower compared with reference Ag-AgCl electrodes. Proximity to the heart or even contact with the body seems to be key but not enough to improve signal quality. However, accurate measurement of RR durations was mostly independent of signal quality since 90% of all RR durations measured on capacitive ECG signals had a percentage error below 5% compared to reference ECG signals. Accuracy was actually algorithm-dependent, where a classic Pan-Tompkins-based algorithm was interestingly outperformed by an in-house frequency-domain algorithm.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207