Cargando…
Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System
This study presents a 2-stage heartbeat classifier of supraventricular (SVB) and ventricular (VB) beats. Stage 1 makes computationally-efficient classification of SVB-beats, using simple correlation threshold criterion for finding close match with a predominant normal (reference) beat template. The...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604143/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26461492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140123 |
_version_ | 1782395013039128576 |
---|---|
author | Krasteva, Vessela Jekova, Irena Leber, Remo Schmid, Ramun Abächerli, Roger |
author_facet | Krasteva, Vessela Jekova, Irena Leber, Remo Schmid, Ramun Abächerli, Roger |
author_sort | Krasteva, Vessela |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study presents a 2-stage heartbeat classifier of supraventricular (SVB) and ventricular (VB) beats. Stage 1 makes computationally-efficient classification of SVB-beats, using simple correlation threshold criterion for finding close match with a predominant normal (reference) beat template. The non-matched beats are next subjected to measurement of 20 basic features, tracking the beat and reference template morphology and RR-variability for subsequent refined classification in SVB or VB-class by Stage 2. Four linear classifiers are compared: cluster, fuzzy, linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and classification tree (CT), all subjected to iterative training for selection of the optimal feature space among extended 210-sized set, embodying interactive second-order effects between 20 independent features. The optimization process minimizes at equal weight the false positives in SVB-class and false negatives in VB-class. The training with European ST-T, AHA, MIT-BIH Supraventricular Arrhythmia databases found the best performance settings of all classification models: Cluster (30 features), Fuzzy (72 features), LDA (142 coefficients), CT (221 decision nodes) with top-3 best scored features: normalized current RR-interval, higher/lower frequency content ratio, beat-to-template correlation. Unbiased test-validation with MIT-BIH Arrhythmia database rates the classifiers in descending order of their specificity for SVB-class: CT (99.9%), LDA (99.6%), Cluster (99.5%), Fuzzy (99.4%); sensitivity for ventricular ectopic beats as part from VB-class (commonly reported in published beat-classification studies): CT (96.7%), Fuzzy (94.4%), LDA (94.2%), Cluster (92.4%); positive predictivity: CT (99.2%), Cluster (93.6%), LDA (93.0%), Fuzzy (92.4%). CT has superior accuracy by 0.3–6.8% points, with the advantage for easy model complexity configuration by pruning the tree consisted of easy interpretable ‘if-then’ rules. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4604143 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46041432015-10-20 Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System Krasteva, Vessela Jekova, Irena Leber, Remo Schmid, Ramun Abächerli, Roger PLoS One Research Article This study presents a 2-stage heartbeat classifier of supraventricular (SVB) and ventricular (VB) beats. Stage 1 makes computationally-efficient classification of SVB-beats, using simple correlation threshold criterion for finding close match with a predominant normal (reference) beat template. The non-matched beats are next subjected to measurement of 20 basic features, tracking the beat and reference template morphology and RR-variability for subsequent refined classification in SVB or VB-class by Stage 2. Four linear classifiers are compared: cluster, fuzzy, linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and classification tree (CT), all subjected to iterative training for selection of the optimal feature space among extended 210-sized set, embodying interactive second-order effects between 20 independent features. The optimization process minimizes at equal weight the false positives in SVB-class and false negatives in VB-class. The training with European ST-T, AHA, MIT-BIH Supraventricular Arrhythmia databases found the best performance settings of all classification models: Cluster (30 features), Fuzzy (72 features), LDA (142 coefficients), CT (221 decision nodes) with top-3 best scored features: normalized current RR-interval, higher/lower frequency content ratio, beat-to-template correlation. Unbiased test-validation with MIT-BIH Arrhythmia database rates the classifiers in descending order of their specificity for SVB-class: CT (99.9%), LDA (99.6%), Cluster (99.5%), Fuzzy (99.4%); sensitivity for ventricular ectopic beats as part from VB-class (commonly reported in published beat-classification studies): CT (96.7%), Fuzzy (94.4%), LDA (94.2%), Cluster (92.4%); positive predictivity: CT (99.2%), Cluster (93.6%), LDA (93.0%), Fuzzy (92.4%). CT has superior accuracy by 0.3–6.8% points, with the advantage for easy model complexity configuration by pruning the tree consisted of easy interpretable ‘if-then’ rules. Public Library of Science 2015-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4604143/ /pubmed/26461492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140123 Text en © 2015 Krasteva et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Krasteva, Vessela Jekova, Irena Leber, Remo Schmid, Ramun Abächerli, Roger Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System |
title | Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System |
title_full | Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System |
title_fullStr | Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System |
title_full_unstemmed | Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System |
title_short | Superiority of Classification Tree versus Cluster, Fuzzy and Discriminant Models in a Heartbeat Classification System |
title_sort | superiority of classification tree versus cluster, fuzzy and discriminant models in a heartbeat classification system |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604143/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26461492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140123 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT krastevavessela superiorityofclassificationtreeversusclusterfuzzyanddiscriminantmodelsinaheartbeatclassificationsystem AT jekovairena superiorityofclassificationtreeversusclusterfuzzyanddiscriminantmodelsinaheartbeatclassificationsystem AT leberremo superiorityofclassificationtreeversusclusterfuzzyanddiscriminantmodelsinaheartbeatclassificationsystem AT schmidramun superiorityofclassificationtreeversusclusterfuzzyanddiscriminantmodelsinaheartbeatclassificationsystem AT abacherliroger superiorityofclassificationtreeversusclusterfuzzyanddiscriminantmodelsinaheartbeatclassificationsystem |