| Literature DB >> 26558169 |
Padmavathi Kora1, Sri Ramakrishna Kalva2.
Abstract
The medical practitioners study the electrical activity of the human heart in order to detect heart diseases from the electrocardiogram (ECG) of the heart patients. A myocardial infarction (MI) or heart attack is a heart disease, that occurs when there is a block (blood clot) in the pathway of one or more coronary blood vessels (arteries) that supply blood to the heart muscle. The abnormalities in the heart can be identified by the changes in the ECG signal. The first step in the detection of MI is Preprocessing of ECGs which removes noise by using filters. Feature extraction is the next key process in detecting the changes in the ECG signals. This paper presents a method for extracting key features from each cardiac beat using Improved Bat algorithm. Using this algorithm best features are extracted, then these best (reduced) features are applied to the input of the neural network classifier. It has been observed that the performance of the classifier is improved with the help of the optimized features.Entities:
Keywords: ECG; Improved Bat algorithm; Myocardial infarction; Neural network classifier
Year: 2015 PMID: 26558169 PMCID: PMC4631839 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1379-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Fig. 1Normal ECG signal
Fig. 2ECG classification flow diagram
Fig. 3Myocardial infarction signal
MIT/BIH PTB data base
| MI records | Normal records |
|---|---|
| s0043lre | s0301lre |
| s0088lre | s0303lre |
| s0100lre | s0306lre |
| s0235lre | s0311lre |
| s0242lre | s0472lre |
| s0386lre | s0469lre |
| s0559lre |
Fig. 4ECG R peak detection
Fig. 5ECG beat segmentation
Fig. 6Change of loudness with iterations
Fig. 7Change pulse emission rate with iterations
Fig. 8Bat algorithm flowchart
Parameters and values
| Parameter values | |
|---|---|
| Population size | 2086 |
| Generations | −30 |
| fmin | 0 |
| fmax | 1 |
| Loudness A | −0.95 |
| Pulse rate r | 0.85 |
Fig. 9Fitness plot
Classification with KNN classifier
| Classifier | Sensi (%) | Speci (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BA + KNN | 53.5 | 52.2 | 53.22 |
| IBA + KNN | 52.5 | 53.2 | 65.1 |
Classification with SVM classifier
| Classifier | Sensi (%) | Speci (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BA + SVM | 76.2 | 75.47 | 72.13 |
| IBA + SVM | 75.5 | 76.9 | 76.74 |
Classification with SCG NN classifier
| Classifier | Sensi (%) | Speci (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BA + SCG NN | 84.42 | 82.28 | 83.13 |
| IBA + SCG NN | 88.2 | 87.2 | 87.9 |
Classification with LM NN classifier
| Classifier | Sensi (%) | Speci (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BA+LM NN | 58.97 | 58.7 | 58.7 |
| IBA+LM NN | 93.342 | 92.2 | 98.9 |
Fig. 10Neural network training with trainlm
Fig. 11Neural network training performance plot
Fig. 12Performance comparison of different classifiers with IBA features
Fig. 13Performance comparison of different classifiers with BA features
Fig. 14Classification accuracy bar plot
Comparative study for detection of MI
| Studies | Approach | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Banerjee and Mitra ( | Cross Wavelet Transform (XWT) | 87.02 |
| Sun et al. ( | Multiple instance Learning (MIL) | 95.86 |
| Spilka et al. ( | Morphological features and SVM | 86 |
| Proposed approach | Improved BA and neural network | 98.9 |