Machine learning models and facial regions videos for estimating heart rate: a review on Patents, Datasets and Literature
Authors:
Tiago Palma Pagano,
Lucas Lemos Ortega,
Victor Rocha Santos,
Yasmin da Silva Bonfim,
José Vinícius Dantas Paranhos,
Paulo Henrique Miranda Sá,
Lian Filipe Santana Nascimento,
Ingrid Winkler,
Erick Giovani Sperandio Nascimento
Abstract:
Estimating heart rate is important for monitoring users in various situations. Estimates based on facial videos are increasingly being researched because it makes it possible to monitor cardiac information in a non-invasive way and because the devices are simpler, requiring only cameras that capture the user's face. From these videos of the user's face, machine learning is able to estimate heart r…
▽ More
Estimating heart rate is important for monitoring users in various situations. Estimates based on facial videos are increasingly being researched because it makes it possible to monitor cardiac information in a non-invasive way and because the devices are simpler, requiring only cameras that capture the user's face. From these videos of the user's face, machine learning is able to estimate heart rate. This study investigates the benefits and challenges of using machine learning models to estimate heart rate from facial videos, through patents, datasets, and articles review. We searched Derwent Innovation, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science knowledge bases and identified 7 patent filings, 11 datasets, and 20 articles on heart rate, photoplethysmography, or electrocardiogram data. In terms of patents, we note the advantages of inventions related to heart rate estimation, as described by the authors. In terms of datasets, we discovered that most of them are for academic purposes and with different signs and annotations that allow coverage for subjects other than heartbeat estimation. In terms of articles, we discovered techniques, such as extracting regions of interest for heart rate reading and using Video Magnification for small motion extraction, and models such as EVM-CNN and VGG-16, that extract the observed individual's heart rate, the best regions of interest for signal extraction and ways to process them.
△ Less
Submitted 17 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
Bias and unfairness in machine learning models: a systematic literature review
Authors:
Tiago Palma Pagano,
Rafael Bessa Loureiro,
Fernanda Vitória Nascimento Lisboa,
Gustavo Oliveira Ramos Cruz,
Rodrigo Matos Peixoto,
Guilherme Aragão de Sousa Guimarães,
Lucas Lisboa dos Santos,
Maira Matos Araujo,
Marco Cruz,
Ewerton Lopes Silva de Oliveira,
Ingrid Winkler,
Erick Giovani Sperandio Nascimento
Abstract:
One of the difficulties of artificial intelligence is to ensure that model decisions are fair and free of bias. In research, datasets, metrics, techniques, and tools are applied to detect and mitigate algorithmic unfairness and bias. This study aims to examine existing knowledge on bias and unfairness in Machine Learning models, identifying mitigation methods, fairness metrics, and supporting tool…
▽ More
One of the difficulties of artificial intelligence is to ensure that model decisions are fair and free of bias. In research, datasets, metrics, techniques, and tools are applied to detect and mitigate algorithmic unfairness and bias. This study aims to examine existing knowledge on bias and unfairness in Machine Learning models, identifying mitigation methods, fairness metrics, and supporting tools. A Systematic Literature Review found 40 eligible articles published between 2017 and 2022 in the Scopus, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, and Google Scholar knowledge bases. The results show numerous bias and unfairness detection and mitigation approaches for ML technologies, with clearly defined metrics in the literature, and varied metrics can be highlighted. We recommend further research to define the techniques and metrics that should be employed in each case to standardize and ensure the impartiality of the machine learning model, thus, allowing the most appropriate metric to detect bias and unfairness in a given context.
△ Less
Submitted 3 November, 2022; v1 submitted 16 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
