来源：中国新闻网 本项研发成果的技术利用无线电信号远程捕捉亚毫米级心脏运动，并通过人工智能驱动的知识转移从心 电图诊断中识别房颤模式。(图片来自Yuqin Yuan和Jinbo Chen，施普林格·自然 供图) 针对这一问题，中国科大和中科知奇研究团队开发出一个系统，通过雷达传感技术以非接触方式记录心 脏机械运动，同时，提出基于知识迁移的网络架构，创新性建立心脏电活动与机械运动模态的关联映 射，利用经过百年验证的心电图信号特征来辅助神经网络识别房颤特有的异常机械波动。该系统实现非 接触、免操作、无需穿戴设备的检测方式，在大型临床验证中达到接近心电图诊断的检测性能。 在本项研究中，研究团队采用6258名门诊患者(包括229名房颤患者)常规30秒心电图检查的数据，对他 们研发的非接触式房颤检测系统进行评估。结果显示，该系统检测房颤的敏感性和特异性与心电图相 当。 随后，研究团队在27名患者的常规睡眠中进一步测试了非接触式房颤检测系统，显示出其在检测房颤存 在和发作方面的潜力。 施普林格·自然旗下学术期刊《自然-通讯》北京时间20日夜间发表一篇医学论文称，基于雷达传感和人 工智能(AI)技术，中国科学家团队最新研发 ...

Group 1 - The core concept of equity income rights financing agreements involves separating ownership and income rights to meet specific financing needs, which can be exploited for illicit benefits in cases of bribery [1] - In a case involving a state-owned company, an executive misused their position to facilitate a private company's financing through an equity income rights agreement, leading to significant financial losses for the state-owned entity [2][3] - The financing agreement was structured to avoid regulatory scrutiny by transferring only income rights, allowing the actual investors to remain anonymous [1][2] Group 2 - The private company, B, sought investment from the state-owned A company for a high-end medical device project, but faced challenges due to high initial costs and long profit cycles [2] - The executive, referred to as A, facilitated the investment by manipulating project evaluations and bypassing standard risk controls, resulting in a 600 million yuan investment from A company into B's project [2][3] - Following B's successful IPO, the executive arranged for a low-priced transfer of income rights, which significantly undervalued the asset compared to market rates, indicating a potential scheme for profit extraction [3][8] Group 3 - The case raised legal debates regarding whether the executive's actions constituted bribery or merely market transactions, with differing opinions on how to assess the value of the received benefits [4][5] - The analysis concluded that the executive's actions were indeed a form of bribery, as they involved a clear agreement to exchange benefits for favorable treatment in investment decisions [6][11] - The executive's actions led to a significant loss for the state-owned company, amounting to 180 million yuan due to the misrepresentation of the private company's financial health [3][12]