| Literature DB >> 33286012 |
Xiefeng Cheng1,2, Pengfei Wang1, Chenjun She1.
Abstract
In this paper, a new method of biometric characterization of heart sounds based on multimodal multiscale dispersion entropy is proposed. Firstly, the heart sound is periodically segmented, and then each single-cycle heart sound is decomposed into a group of intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) by improved complete ensemble empirical mode decomposition with adaptive noise (ICEEMDAN). These IMFs are then segmented to a series of frames, which is used to calculate the refine composite multiscale dispersion entropy (RCMDE) as the characteristic representation of heart sound. In the simulation experiments I, carried out on the open heart sounds database Michigan, Washington and Littman, the feature representation method was combined with the heart sound segmentation method based on logistic regression (LR) and hidden semi-Markov models (HSMM), and feature selection was performed through the Fisher ratio (FR). Finally, the Euclidean distance (ED) and the close principle are used for matching and identification, and the recognition accuracy rate was 96.08%. To improve the practical application value of this method, the proposed method was applied to 80 heart sounds database constructed by 40 volunteer heart sounds to discuss the effect of single-cycle heart sounds with different starting positions on performance in experiment II. The experimental results show that the single-cycle heart sound with the starting position of the start of the first heart sound (S1) has the highest recognition rate of 97.5%. In summary, the proposed method is effective for heart sound biometric recognition.Entities:
Keywords: Fisher ratio; ICEEMDAN; RCMDE; biometric characterization; heart sound
Year: 2020 PMID: 33286012 PMCID: PMC7516671 DOI: 10.3390/e22020238
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1The feature generation flowchart of the multimodal multiscale dispersion entropy.
Figure 2Heart sound database collected by our group: (a) Ω shoulder-belt wireless heart sound sensor; (b) The processing of collecting heart sound.
Figure 3Four methods of heart sound cycle segmentation. (a) A series of cardiac cycles segmented from the beginning of S1 to the beginning of the next S1 of the current heart sound recording; (b) a series of cardiac cycles segmented from the beginning of the systole to the beginning of the next systole of the current heart sound recording; (c) a series of cardiac cycles segmented from the beginning of S2 to the beginning of the next S2 of the current heart sound recording; (d) a series of cardiac cycles segmented from the beginning of the diastole to the beginning of the next diastole of the current heart sound recording.
Figure 4Comparison of refine composite multiscale dispersion entropy (RCMDE) characteristics of single-cycle heart sounds after windowing and framing: (a) Comparison of RCMDE characteristics of two single-cycle heart sounds of the same person; (b) comparison of RCMDE characteristics of two single-cycle heart sounds of different persons.
Comparison of the recognition performance of setting different frame length and frameshift based on the cardiac cycle on the three open heart sound databases.
| Heart Sound Database | Including 2005 Single-Cycle Heart Sounds from the Open Database Michigan, Washington, and Littman | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Algorithm | RCMDE-ED | ||
| win (inc = win) |
| inc (win = T/4) |
|
| T | 45.16% | win | 84.55% |
| T/2 | 78.71% | win/2 | 84.82% |
| T/3 | 82.52% | win/3 | 88.88% |
| T/4 | 84.55% | win/4 | 87.11% |
| T/5 | 81.09% | win/5 | 90.08% |
| T/6 | 82.83% | win/6 | 88.68% |
| T/7 | 81.56% | win/7 | 88.20% |
| T/8 | 76.77% | win/8 | 88.64% |
| T/9 | 75.13% | win/9 | 89.66% |
| T/10 | 65.40% | win/10 | 89.47% |
Comparison of the recognition performance of taking different intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) as the input of the algorithm on the three open heart sound databases.
| Heart Sound Database | Including 2005 Single-Cycle Heart Sounds from the Open Database Michigan, Washington, and Littman | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Algorithm | ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-ED | ||
| Input |
| Input |
|
| IMF 1 | 90.04% | IMF 5 | 41.08% |
| IMF 2 | 88.96% | IMF 6 | 24.28% |
| IMF 3 | 82.68% | IMF 7 | 14.94% |
| IMF 4 | 59.58% | IMF 8 | 12.15% |
Figure 5The feature characterization based on the different algorithms (a) the feature characterization based RCMDE; (b) the new feature characterization based on the combination of improved complete ensemble empirical mode decomposition with adaptive noise (ICEEMDAN) and RCMDE.
Comparison of the recognition performance of RCMDE and ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-Fisher ratio (FR) algorithms on the three open heart sound databases.
| Heart Sound Database | Including 2005 Single-Cycle Heart Sounds from the Open Database Michigan, Washington, and Littman | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Feature Extraction | Numbers of Feature |
| Kappa Coefficients |
| RCMDE | 320 | 90.08% | 0.8994 |
| ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-FR | 300 | 96.08% | 0.9602 |
Comparison of average test accuracy , standard deviation and t value corresponding to n random trials.
| The Average Test Accuracy | Standard Deviation | The Critical Value Range | The Degree of Confidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.9681 | 0.0147 | 1.570 | [−2.262, 2.262] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9653 | 0.0146 | 1.378 | [−2.093, 2.093] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9634 | 0.0144 | 0.989 | [−2.045, 2.045] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9639 | 0.0161 | 1.362 | [−2.010, 2.010] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9603 | 0.0162 | −0.309 | [−1.984, 1.984] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9608 | 0.0162 | 0 | [−1.972, 1.972] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9606 | 0.0162 | −0.214 | [−1.968, 1.968] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9608 | 0.0162 | 0 | [−1.966, 1.966] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9607 | 0.0162 | −0.138 | [−1.965, 1.965] | 0.95 | |
| 0.9608 | 0.0162 | 0 | [−1.964, 1.964] | 0.95 |
Comparison of recognition performance of SVM, KNN and ED classifier on the three open heart sound databases.
| Heart Sound Database | Including 2005 Single-Cycle Heart Sounds from the Open Database Michigan, Washington, and Littman | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feature Extraction | ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-FR | |||
| Classifier | Classifier Parameter | Speed |
| Kappa Coefficients |
| SVM | Slowest | 95.91% | 0.9585 | |
| KNN | Medium | 73.14% | 0.7276 | |
| 84.83% | 0.8462 | |||
| 95.97% | 0.9591 | |||
| ED and the close principle | None | Fastest | 96.08% | 0.9602 |
Figure 6Four cardiac cycle segmentation methods based on different initial segmentation points. (a) The starting position of the first S1 appearing in the heart sound recording is taken as the initial dividing point; (b) the starting position of the first systole appearing in the heart sound recording is taken as the initial dividing point; (c) the starting position of the first S2 appearing in the heart sound recording is taken as the initial dividing point; (d) the starting position of the first diastole appearing in the heart sound recording is taken as the initial dividing point.
The recognition effect of ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-FR-ED on the self-built heart sound database.
| Heart Sound Database | Including the 80 Heart Sound Recordings from the Self-Built Heart Sound Database | |
|---|---|---|
| Algorithm | ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-FR-ED | |
| The Starting and Ending Position of the Input Single-Cycle Heart Sound | CRR | Kappa Coefficients |
| the starting position of S1—the starting position of next S1 | 97.5% | 0.9744 |
| the starting position of systole—the starting position of next systole | 92.5% | 0.9231 |
| the starting position of S2—the starting position of next S2 | 95.0% | 0.9487 |
| the starting position of diastole—the starting position of next diastole | 95.0% | 0.9487 |
Compared with the related literature.
| Comparative Literature | Heart Sound Database | Feature Extraction | Classifier | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phua et al. [ | 10 people | LFBC | VQ | CRR = 94% |
| GMM | CRR = 96% | |||
| Fatemian et al. [ | 21 subjects | STFT | LDA and ED | CRR = 100% |
| Tran et al. [ | 52 users | temporal shape, spectral shape, MFCC, LFCC, harmonic feature, rhythmic feature, cardiac feature and GMM-super vector | RFE-SVM | CRR = 80% |
| Jasper and Othman [ | 10 people | WT-SSE | Template matching | CRR = 98.67% |
| Cheng et al. [ | 12 people 300 HS | HS-LBFC | similar distances | CRR = 99% |
| Cheng et al. [ | 10 people | ICC-ISF | similar distances | CRR = 85.7% |
| Zhao et al. [ | 40 participants 280 samples | MS | VQ and ED | CRR = 94.16% |
| HSCT-11 80 subjects | CRR = 92% | |||
| Gautam and Deepesh [ | 10 subjects | segment S1 and S2 by windowing and thresholding +WT | BP-MLP-ANN | CRR = 90.52% |
| Tan et al. [ | 52 users | extract S1 and S2 by ZCR and STA techniques + MFCC | SRC | CRR = 85.45% |
| Verma and Tanuja [ | 30 people | MFCC | SVM | CRR = 96% |
| Abo Zahhad et al. [ | 17 subjects | MFCC, LFCC, BFCC and DWT+ CCA | GMM and Bayesian rules | CRR = 99% |
| Abo Zahhad et al. [ | HSCT-11 206 subjects | WPCC | LDA and Bayesian Decision Rules | CRR = 90.26% |
| NLFCC | CRR = 92.94% | |||
| BioSec. 21 subjects | WPCC | CRR = 97.02% | ||
| NLFCC | CRR = 98.1% | |||
| The proposed method | Michigan, Washington, and Littman 72 subjects | segment cardiac cycle by LR-HSMM + framing and windowing + ICEEMDAN-RCMDE-FR | SVM | CRR = 95.91% |
| KNN | CRR = 95.97% | |||
| ED and the close principle | CRR = 96.08% | |||
| 40 users 80 HS | ED and the close principle | CRR = 97.5% |