ArticleFrontiers in physiology2021
POD-Enhanced Deep Learning-Based Reduced Order Models for the Real-Time Simulation of Cardiac Electrophysiology in the Left Atrium.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid prediction of cardiac activation in the left ventricle with geometric deep learning: a step towards cardiac resynchronization therapy planning.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Accelerated simulation methodologies for computational vascular flow modelling.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Review
- Simultaneous data assimilation and cardiac electrophysiology model correction using differentiable physics and deep learning.Interface focus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The numerical simulation of multiple scenarios easily becomes computationally prohibitive for cardiac electrophysiology (EP) problems if relying on usual high-fidelity, full order models (FOMs). Likewise, the use of traditional reduced order models (ROMs) for parametrized PDEs to speed up the solution of the aforementioned problems can be problematic. This is primarily due to the strong variability characterizing the solution set and to the nonlinear nature of the input-output maps that we intend to reconstruct numerically. To enhance ROM efficiency, we proposed a new generation of non-intrusive, nonlinear ROMs, based on deep learning (DL) algorithms, such as convolutional, feedforward, and autoencoder neural networks. In the proposed DL-ROM, both the nonlinear solution manifold and the nonlinear reduced dynamics used to model the system evolution on that manifold can be learnt in a non-intrusive way thanks to DL algorithms trained on a set of FOM snapshots. DL-ROMs were shown to be able to accurately capture complex front propagation processes, both in physiological and pathological cardiac EP, very rapidly once neural networks were trained, however, at the expense of huge training costs. In this study, we show that performing a prior dimensionality reduction on FOM snapshots through randomized proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) enables to speed up training times and to decrease networks complexity. Accuracy and efficiency of this strategy, which we refer to as POD-DL-ROM, are assessed in the context of cardiac EP on an idealized left atrium (LA) geometry and considering snapshots arising from a NURBS (non-uniform rational B-splines)-based isogeometric analysis (IGA) discretization. Once the ROMs have been trained, POD-DL-ROMs can efficiently solve both physiological and pathological cardiac EP problems, for any new scenario, in real-time, even in extremely challenging contexts such as those featuring circuit re-entries, that are among the factors triggering cardiac arrhythmias.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.