Romis Attux

Bio: Romis Attux is an academic researcher from State University of Campinas. The author has contributed to research in topics: Blind signal separation & Source separation. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 168 publications receiving 1167 citations.

Unsupervised Signal Processing: Channel Equalization and Source Separation

Abstract: Introduction Channel Equalization Source Separation Organization and Contents Statistical Characterization of Signals and Systems Signals and Systems Digital Signal Processing Probability Theory and Randomness Stochastic Processes Estimation Theory Linear Optimal and Adaptive Filtering Supervised Linear Filtering Wiener Filtering The Steepest-Descent Algorithm The Least Mean Square Algorithm The Method of Least Squares A Few Remarks Concerning Structural Extensions Linear Filtering without a Reference Signal Linear Prediction Revisited Unsupervised Channel Equalization The Unsupervised Deconvolution Problem Fundamental Theorems Bussgang Algorithms The Shalvi-Weinstein Algorithm The Super-Exponential Algorithm Analysis of the Equilibrium Solutions of Unsupervised Criteria Relationships between Equalization Criteria Unsupervised Multichannel Equalization Systems withMultiple Inputs and/orMultiple Outputs SIMO Channel Equalization Methods for Blind SIMO Equalization MIMO Channels and Multiuser Processing Blind Source Separation The Problem of Blind Source Separation Independent Component Analysis Algorithms for Independent Component Analysis Other Approaches for Blind Source Separation Convolutive Mixtures Nonlinear Mixtures Nonlinear Filtering and Machine Learning Decision-Feedback Equalizers Volterra Filters Equalization as a Classification Task Artificial Neural Network Bio-Inspired Optimization Methods Why Bio-Inspired Computing? Genetic Algorithms Artificial Immune Systems Particle Swarm Optimization Appendix A: Some Properties of the Correlation Matrix Appendix B: Kalman Filter References Index

A deep convolutional neural network for COVID-19 detection using chest X-rays

Abstract: We present image classifiers based on Dense Convolutional Networks and transfer learning to classify chest X-ray images according to three labels: COVID-19, pneumonia, and normal. We fine-tuned neural networks pretrained on ImageNet and applied a twice transfer learning approach, using NIH ChestX-ray14 dataset as an intermediate step. We also suggested a novelty called output neuron keeping, which changes the twice transfer learning technique. In order to clarify the modus operandi of the models, we used Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) to generate heatmaps. We were able to reach test accuracy of 100% on our test dataset. Twice transfer learning and output neuron keeping showed promising results improving performances, mainly in the beginning of the training process. Although LRP revealed that words on the X-rays can influence the networks’ predictions, we discovered this had only a very small effect on accuracy. Although clinical studies and larger datasets are still needed to further ensure good generalization, the state-of-the-art performances we achieved show that, with the help of artificial intelligence, chest X-rays can become a cheap and accurate auxiliary method for COVID-19 diagnosis. Heatmaps generated by LRP improve the interpretability of the deep neural networks and indicate an analytical path for future research on diagnosis. Twice transfer learning with output neuron keeping improved DNN performance.

A Deep Convolutional Neural Network for COVID-19 Detection Using Chest X-Rays

Abstract: Purpose: We present image classifiers based on Dense Convolutional Networks and transfer learning to classify chest X-ray images according to three labels: COVID-19, pneumonia and normal. Methods: We fine-tuned neural networks pretrained on ImageNet and applied a twice transfer learning approach, using NIH ChestX-ray14 dataset as an intermediate step. We also suggested a novelty called output neuron keeping, which changes the twice transfer learning technique. In order to clarify the modus operandi of the models, we used Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) to generate heatmaps. Results: We were able to reach test accuracy of 100% on our test dataset. Twice transfer learning and output neuron keeping showed promising results improving performances, mainly in the beginning of the training process. Although LRP revealed that words on the X-rays can influence the networks' predictions, we discovered this had only a very small effect on accuracy. Conclusion: Although clinical studies and larger datasets are still needed to further ensure good generalization, the state-of-the-art performances we achieved show that, with the help of artificial intelligence, chest X-rays can become a cheap and accurate auxiliary method for COVID-19 diagnosis. Heatmaps generated by LRP improve the interpretability of the deep neural networks and indicate an analytical path for future research on diagnosis. Twice transfer learning with output neuron keeping improved performances.

Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning

Abstract: Probability Distributions.- Linear Models for Regression.- Linear Models for Classification.- Neural Networks.- Kernel Methods.- Sparse Kernel Machines.- Graphical Models.- Mixture Models and EM.- Approximate Inference.- Sampling Methods.- Continuous Latent Variables.- Sequential Data.- Combining Models.

Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: systematic review and critical appraisal

Abstract: Objective To review and appraise the validity and usefulness of published and preprint reports of prediction models for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in patients with suspected infection, for prognosis of patients with covid-19, and for detecting people in the general population at increased risk of covid-19 infection or being admitted to hospital with the disease. Design Living systematic review and critical appraisal by the COVID-PRECISE (Precise Risk Estimation to optimise covid-19 Care for Infected or Suspected patients in diverse sEttings) group. Data sources PubMed and Embase through Ovid, up to 1 July 2020, supplemented with arXiv, medRxiv, and bioRxiv up to 5 May 2020. Study selection Studies that developed or validated a multivariable covid-19 related prediction model. Data extraction At least two authors independently extracted data using the CHARMS (critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies) checklist; risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST (prediction model risk of bias assessment tool). Results 37 421 titles were screened, and 169 studies describing 232 prediction models were included. The review identified seven models for identifying people at risk in the general population; 118 diagnostic models for detecting covid-19 (75 were based on medical imaging, 10 to diagnose disease severity); and 107 prognostic models for predicting mortality risk, progression to severe disease, intensive care unit admission, ventilation, intubation, or length of hospital stay. The most frequent types of predictors included in the covid-19 prediction models are vital signs, age, comorbidities, and image features. Flu-like symptoms are frequently predictive in diagnostic models, while sex, C reactive protein, and lymphocyte counts are frequent prognostic factors. Reported C index estimates from the strongest form of validation available per model ranged from 0.71 to 0.99 in prediction models for the general population, from 0.65 to more than 0.99 in diagnostic models, and from 0.54 to 0.99 in prognostic models. All models were rated at high or unclear risk of bias, mostly because of non-representative selection of control patients, exclusion of patients who had not experienced the event of interest by the end of the study, high risk of model overfitting, and unclear reporting. Many models did not include a description of the target population (n=27, 12%) or care setting (n=75, 32%), and only 11 (5%) were externally validated by a calibration plot. The Jehi diagnostic model and the 4C mortality score were identified as promising models. Conclusion Prediction models for covid-19 are quickly entering the academic literature to support medical decision making at a time when they are urgently needed. This review indicates that almost all pubished prediction models are poorly reported, and at high risk of bias such that their reported predictive performance is probably optimistic. However, we have identified two (one diagnostic and one prognostic) promising models that should soon be validated in multiple cohorts, preferably through collaborative efforts and data sharing to also allow an investigation of the stability and heterogeneity in their performance across populations and settings. Details on all reviewed models are publicly available at https://www.covprecise.org/. Methodological guidance as provided in this paper should be followed because unreliable predictions could cause more harm than benefit in guiding clinical decisions. Finally, prediction model authors should adhere to the TRIPOD (transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis) reporting guideline. Systematic review registration Protocol https://osf.io/ehc47/, registration https://osf.io/wy245. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 3 of the original article published on 7 April 2020 (BMJ 2020;369:m1328). Previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1328/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.