The gold standard to assess whether a baby is at risk of oxygen deprivation during childbirth, is monitoring continuously the fetal heart rate with cardiotocography (CTG). The aim is to identify babies that could benefit from an emergency operative delivery (e.g., Cesarean section), in order to prevent death or permanent brain injury. The long, dynamic and complex CTG patterns are poorly understood and known to have high false positive and false negative rates. Visual interpretation by clinicians is challenging and reliable accurate fetal monitoring in labor remains an enormous unmet medical need. In this work, we applied deep learning methods to achieve data-driven automated CTG evaluation. Multimodal Convolutional Neural Network (MCNN) and Stacked MCNN models were used to analyze the largest available database of routinely collected CTG and linked clinical data (comprising more than 35000 births). We also assessed in detail the impact of the signal quality on the MCNN performance. On a large hold-out testing set from Oxford ( $n= 4429$ births), MCNN improved the prediction of cord acidemia at birth when compared with Clinical Practice and previous computerized approaches. On two external datasets, MCNN demonstrated better performance compared to current feature extraction-based methods. Our group is the first to apply deep learning for the analysis of CTG. We conclude that MCNN hold potential for the prediction of cord acidemia at birth and further work is warranted. Despite the advances, our deep learning models are currently not suitable for the detection of severe fetal injury in the absence of cord acidemia – a heterogeneous, small, and poorly understood group. We suggest that the most promising way forward are hybrid approaches to CTG interpretation in labor, in which different diagnostic models can estimate the risk for different types of fetal compromise, incorporating clinical knowledge with data-driven analyses.

Predicting volatility is a critical activity for taking risk- adjusted decisions in asset trading and allocation. In order to provide effective decision-making support, in this paper we investigate the profitability of a deep Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) Neural Network for forecasting daily stock market volatility using a panel of 28 assets representative of the Dow Jones Industrial Average index combined with the market factor proxied by the SPY and, separately, a panel of 92 assets belonging to the NASDAQ 100 index. The Dow Jones plus SPY data are from January 2002 to August 2008, while the NASDAQ 100 is from December 2012 to November 2017. If, on the one hand, we expect that this evolutionary behavior can be effectively captured adaptively through the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) flexible methods, on the other, in this setting, standard parametric approaches could fail to provide optimal predictions. We compared the volatility forecasts generated by the LSTM approach to those obtained through use of widely recognized benchmarks models in this field, in particular, univariate parametric models such as the Realized Generalized Autoregressive Conditionally Heteroskedastic (R-GARCH) and the Glosten–Jagannathan–Runkle Multiplicative Error Models (GJR-MEM). The results demonstrate the superiority of the LSTM over the widely popular R-GARCH and GJR-MEM univariate parametric methods, when forecasting in condition of high volatility, while still producing comparable predictions for more tranquil periods.

A possible application of neural networks for timely and reliable recognition of radar signal emitters is investigated. In particular, a large data set of intercepted generic radar signal samples is used for investigating and evaluating several neural network topologies, training parameters, input and output coding and machine learning facilitating data transformations. Three case studies are discussed, where in the first two the radar signals are classified in two broad classes – with civil or military application, based on patterns in their pulse train characteristics and in the third one trained to distinguish between several more specific radar functions. Very competitive results of about 82%, 84% and 67% are achieved on the testing data sets