For efficient utilization of operating rooms (ORs), accurate schedules of assigned block time and sequences of patient cases need to be made. The quality of these planning tools is dependent on the accurate prediction of total procedure time (TPT) per case. In this paper, we attempt to improve the accuracy of TPT predictions by using linear regression models based on estimated surgeon-controlled time (eSCT) and other variables relevant to TPT. We extracted data from a Dutch benchmarking database of all surgeries performed in six academic hospitals in The Netherlands from 2012 till 2016. The final dataset consisted of 79,983 records, describing 199,772 h of total OR time. Potential predictors of TPT that were included in the subsequent analysis were eSCT, patient age, type of operation, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, and type of anesthesia used. First, we computed the predicted TPT based on a previously described fixed ratio model for each record, multiplying eSCT by 1.33. This number is based on the research performed by van Veen-Berkx et al., which showed that 33% of SCT is generally a good approximation of anesthesia-controlled time (ACT). We then systematically tested all possible linear regression models to predict TPT using eSCT in combination with the other available independent variables. In addition, all regression models were again tested without eSCT as a predictor to predict ACT separately (which leads to TPT by adding SCT). TPT was most accurately predicted using a linear regression model based on the independent variables eSCT, type of operation, ASA classification, and type of anesthesia. This model performed significantly better than the fixed ratio model and the method of predicting ACT separately. Making use of these more accurate predictions in planning and sequencing algorithms may enable an increase in utilization of ORs, leading to significant financial and productivity related benefits.
Bootstrapping is used to approximate the standard error and 95% confidence intervals of MMRE and PRED for a number of COCOMO I model variations applied to four PROMISE data sets. This is used to illustrate a lack of confidence in numerous published cost estimation research results based on MMRE and PRED comparisons such as model selection. We show that many such results are of questionable significance due to large possible variations resulting from population sampling error and suggest that a number of inconsistent and contradictory results may be explained by this. By using more standard statistical approaches that account for standard error, we may reduce the incidence of this and obtain greater confidence cost estimation in research results.
Recent advances in neural TTS have led to models that can produce high-quality synthetic speech. However, these models typically require large amounts of training data, which can make it costly to produce a new voice with the desired quality. Although multi-speaker modeling can reduce the data requirements necessary for a new voice, this approach is usually not viable for many low-resource languages for which abundant multi-speaker data is not available. In this paper, we therefore investigated to what extent multilingual multi-speaker modeling can be an alternative to monolingual multi-speaker modeling, and explored how data from foreign languages may best be combined with low-resource language data. We found that multilingual modeling can increase the naturalness of low-resource language speech, showed that multilingual models can produce speech with a naturalness comparable to monolingual multispeaker models, and saw that the target language naturalness was affected by the strategy used to add foreign language data.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.