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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krasteva, Vessela, Jekova, Irena, Leber, Remo, Schmid, Ramun, Abächerli, Roger
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