MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Pulse Oximetry Accuracy with Personal Parameter Integration in Wearable Devices

2025· article· W4416726489 on OpenAlexaff
Arda Karli, Musa Guler, Hakan Burak Karli, Bige Deniz Unluturk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsAlgonquin College
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPulse oximetryWearable computerPhotoplethysmogramOxygen saturationArtificial neural networkCalibrationKey (lock)Computation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulse oximetry is a standard method for noninvasive clinical monitoring of peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), a key vital sign, yet studies highlight its reduced accuracy in individuals with darker skin pigmentation, often resulting in occult hypoxemia. This discrepancy arises from calibration biases and the optical effects of elevated melanin levels, which interfere with light transmission and absorption. To address this disparity, we propose a lightweight, machine learning-based correction model that estimates arterial oxygen saturation from SpO2readings by incorporating demographic and skin pigmentation metrics. Leveraging the OpenOximetry dataset and deploying compact neural networks, we trained and optimized a model suitable for real-time operation on resource-constrained edge hardware. The model was quantized using TensorFlow Lite to minimize memory and computation requirements. Deployment and testing on a Raspberry Pi 5 confirmed feasibility, with the quantized model achieving an RMSE of$\mathbf{2. 1 0 3 \%}$and$R^{2}$of$\mathbf{0. 9 4 7}$while requiring 43.5 KB of RAM and 122 ms inference time. Our approach demonstrates a viable path to bias-aware, accurate oxygen monitoring by enabling demographically informed SpO2correction on edge devices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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