↓ Skip to main content

Remote photoplethysmography with constrained ICA using periodicity and chrominance constraints

Overview of attention for article published in BioMedical Engineering OnLine, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Remote photoplethysmography with constrained ICA using periodicity and chrominance constraints
Published in
BioMedical Engineering OnLine, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12938-018-0450-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Macwan, Yannick Benezeth, Alamin Mansouri

Abstract

Remote photoplethysmography (rPPG) has been in the forefront recently for measuring cardiac pulse rates from live or recorded videos. It finds advantages in scenarios requiring remote monitoring, such as medicine and fitness, where contact based monitoring is limiting and cumbersome. The blood volume pulse, defined as the pulsative flow of arterial blood, gives rise to periodic changes in the skin color which are then quantified to estimate a temporal signal. This temporal signal can be analysed using various methods to extract the representative cardiac signal. We present a novel method for measuring rPPG signals using constrained independent component analysis (cICA). We incorporate a priori information into the cICA algorithm to aid in the extraction of the most prominent rPPG signal. This a priori information is implemented using two constraints: first, based on periodicity using autocorrelation, and second, a chrominance-based constraint exploiting the physical characteristics of the skin. Our method showed improved performances over traditional blind source separation methods like ICA and chrominance based methods with mean absolute errors of 0.62 beats per minute (BPM) and 3.14 BPM for the two datasets in our inhouse video database UBFC-RPPG, and 4.69 BPM for the public MMSE-HR dataset. Its performance was also better in comparison to other state of the art methods in terms of accuracy and robustness. Our UBFC-RPPG database is also made publicly available and is specifically aimed towards testing rPPG measurements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 20 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 17 27%
Computer Science 12 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Psychology 1 2%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 25 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 August 2020.
All research outputs
#4,243,742
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#98
of 825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,553
of 442,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 825 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.