4.6 Article

Advanced Time-Frequency Methods for ECG Waves Recognition

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13020308

关键词

ECG; iris-spectrogram; scalogram; CNN; ResNet101; ShuffleNet; heart rhythm

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used two different spectrum representations, iris-spectrogram and scalogram, to extract deep features and classify different ECG beat waves using two deep convolutional neural networks (CNN), ResNet101 and ShuffleNet. The results showed that using ResNet101 and scalogram of T-wave achieved the highest accuracy of 98.3% for beat rhythm detection, while using iris-spectrogram and ResNet101 for QRS-wave achieved an accuracy of 94.4%. In conclusion, deep features from time-frequency representation of ECG beat waves can accurately detect basic rhythms such as normal, tachycardia, and bradycardia.
ECG wave recognition is one of the new topics where only one of the ECG beat waves (P-QRS-T) was used to detect heart diseases. Normal, tachycardia, and bradycardia heart rhythm are hard to detect using either time-domain or frequency-domain features solely, and a time-frequency analysis is required to extract representative features. This paper studies the performance of two different spectrum representations, iris-spectrogram and scalogram, for different ECG beat waves in terms of recognition of normal, tachycardia, and bradycardia classes. These two different spectra are then sent to two different deep convolutional neural networks (CNN), i.e., Resnet101 and ShuffleNet, for deep feature extraction and classification. The results show that the best accuracy for detection of beats rhythm was using ResNet101 and scalogram of T-wave with an accuracy of 98.3%, while accuracy was 94.4% for detection using iris-spectrogram using also ResNet101 and QRS-Wave. Finally, based on these results we note that using deep features from time-frequency representation using one wave of ECG beat we can accurately detect basic rhythms such as normal, tachycardia, and bradycardia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据