| Literature DB >> 35677767 |
Hariprasath Manoharan1, Shitharth Selvarajan2, Ayman Yafoz3, Hassan A Alterazi3, Mueen Uddin4, Chin-Ling Chen5,6,7, Chih-Ming Wu8.
Abstract
The production, testing, and processing of signals without any interpretation is a crucial task with time scale periods in today's biological applications. As a result, the proposed work attempts to use a deep learning model to handle difficulties that arise during the processing stage of biomedical information. Deep Conviction Systems (DCS) are employed at the integration step for this procedure, which uses classification processes with a large number of characteristics. In addition, a novel system model for analyzing the behavior of biomedical signals has been developed, complete with an output tracking mechanism that delivers transceiver results in a low-power implementation approach. Because low-power transceivers are integrated, the cost of implementation for designated output units will be decreased. To prove the effectiveness of DCS feasibility, convergence and robustness characteristics are observed by incorporating an interface system that is processed with a deep learning toolbox. They compared test results using DCS to prove that all experimental scenarios prove to be much more effective for about 79 percent for variations with time periods.Entities:
Keywords: Fourier filters; biomedical signals; cross points; deep learning; sensors
Year: 2022 PMID: 35677767 PMCID: PMC9168426 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.909628
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Figure 1The implementation procedure of Deep Conviction Systems (DCS) for realizing biomedical signals.
Figure 2Representation of recorded data.
Separation of stable and noisy signals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | 8 | 18 | 5 | 2 |
| 120 | 13 | 34 | 7 | 3 |
| 180 | 17 | 45 | 4 | 3 |
| 240 | 23 | 52 | 2 | 0 |
| 300 | 27 | 58 | 3 | 0 |
Figure 3Time scale vs. Samples.
Combined rates of samples.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −2 | 21 | 10 | 147 | 219 |
| −1 | 24 | 6 | 213 | 345 |
| 0 | 17 | 3 | 254 | 423 |
| 1 | 13 | 2 | 314 | 497 |
| 2 | 11 | 2 | 368 | 536 |
| 3 | 8 | 2 | 416 | 589 |
Figure 4Separation of distance in the incidence of data set.
Distance of separation.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 4 | 22.6 | 23.4 |
| 4 | 8 | 32.4 | 38.7 |
| 6 | 12 | 47.8 | 53.1 |
| 8 | 16 | 52.3 | 62.4 |
| 10 | 20 | 59.5 | 66.9 |
Figure 5Activation function with iteration periods.
Iteration and activation function.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 20 | 0.5 | 1.5 |
| 3 | 40 | 0.5 | 2 |
| 4 | 60 | 1 | 2 |
| 5 | 80 | 1 | 2.5 |
| 6 | 100 | 1.5 | 3 |
Figure 6Implementation cost.
Cost of existing and proposed methods.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 15000 | 6700 |
| 6 | 23000 | 11300 |
| 9 | 45000 | 15600 |
| 12 | 60000 | 17200 |
| 15 | 94000 | 21500 |
Figure 7Marginal periods with the allocation of resources.
Figure 8The complexity of time intervals.
Figure 9Convergence characteristics.
Figure 10Low robust points of DCS.