MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 4368538: Fusion Machine Learning Architectures for Improving ECG classification of acute coronary events

2025· article· en· W4415793817 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Ji, Nathan T. Riek, Tanmay Gokhale, Murat Akçakaya, Ervin Sejdić, Salah S. Al‐Zaiti

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsThornhill Medical (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom forestDeep learningAcute coronary syndromeArtificial neural networkTest setMyocardial infarctionTree (set theory)Decision tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a life-threatening emergency, with occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) requiring rapid diagnosis and treatment. The 12-lead ECG remains the primary diagnostic tool, and AI-based ECG analysis increasingly shows superior accuracy over clinicians. Most existing models, including our own, use either feature-based machine learning (e.g., random forest) or deep learning on raw waveforms. In this study, we explore fusion architectures that integrate our prior random forest (ECGSMART_RF) and neural network (ECGSMART_CNN) models to improve ACS and OMI classification. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an observational cohort study that enrolled consecutive patients with chest pain. Patients were followed up for 30 days and outcomes were adjudicated by independent reviewers. Dataset was partitioned 80% training, 10% validation, and 10% testing. We propose four fusion strategies to integrate our existing ECG representations—handcrafted features and median beat waveforms—using two model architectures: random forest and CNN. The first two strategies use decision-level fusion. The fusion without retraining approach combines model outputs directly via logistic regression, while the fusion with retraining method introduces a linear layer that updates the weights of individual models through backpropagation. The other two strategies apply feature-level fusion. One concatenates intermediate embeddings from CNN with handcrafted features; the other combines these embeddings with individual tree predictions from the random forest model and passes them through an attention mechanism to learn the optimal combination. Detailed architectures for each fusion method are shown in Figures 1A–D. Models were evaluated on test set using ROC and PR curves. Results: Our dataset included 10,393 serial ECGs from 7,397 unique patients from two clinical sites (age 59 ± 16, 46% females). Figure 1E shows performances of the four fusion models on the test set (n=741, OMI = 7.2%, ACS = 13.7%) against baseline performance of individual models. Simple decision fusion architecture outperforms baseline classifiers and more complex embedding-based fusions. Conclusion: Decision fusion, which integrates models with distinct ECG representations, is capable of adaptively prioritizing the more informative model while incorporating complementary insights.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designObservational
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 venueCirculationSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207