MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7021177760

Neural Networks: A Diagnostic Tool for Gastric Electrical Uncoupling?

2009· article· en· W7021177760 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBulgarian Digital Mathematics Library (BulDML) at IMI-BAS (Institute of Mathematics and Informatics) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNucleofectionHyporeflexiaGestational periodDiafiltrationArticular cartilage damageFusible alloy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural Networks have been successfully employed in different biomedical settings. They have been\nuseful for feature extractions from images and biomedical data in a variety of diagnostic applications. In this\npaper, they are applied as a diagnostic tool for classifying different levels of gastric electrical uncoupling in\ncontrolled acute experiments on dogs. Data was collected from 16 dogs using six bipolar electrodes inserted into\nthe serosa of the antral wall. Each dog underwent three recordings under different conditions: (1) basal state, (2)\nmild surgically-induced uncoupling, and (3) severe surgically-induced uncoupling. For each condition half-hour\nrecordings were made. The neural network was implemented according to the Learning Vector Quantization\nmodel. This is a supervised learning model of the Kohonen Self-Organizing Maps. Majority of the recordings\ncollected from the dogs were used for network training. Remaining recordings served as a testing tool to examine\nthe validity of the training procedure. Approximately 90% of the dogs from the neural network training set were\nclassified properly. However, only 31% of the dogs not included in the training process were accurately\ndiagnosed. The poor neural-network based diagnosis of recordings that did not participate in the training process\nmight have been caused by inappropriate representation of input data. Previous research has suggested\ncharacterizing signals according to certain features of the recorded data. This method, if employed, would reduce\nthe noise and possibly improve the diagnostic abilities of the neural network.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulgarian Digital Mathematics Library (BulDML) at IMI-BAS (Institute of Mathematics and Informatics)Same topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207