| Literature DB >> 35551232 |
Abstract
Respiratory sounds are expressed as nonlinear and nonstationary signals, whose unpredictability makes it difficult to extract significant features for classification. Static cepstral coefficients such as Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs), have been used for classification of lung sound signals. However, they are modeled in high-dimensional hyperspectral space, and also lose temporal dependency information. Therefore, we propose shifted [Formula: see text]-cepstral coefficients in lower-subspace (SDC-L) as a novel feature for lung sound classification. It preserves temporal dependency information of multiple frames nearby same to original SDC, and improves feature extraction by reducing the hyperspectral dimension. We modified EMD algorithm by adding a stopping rule to objectively select a finite number of intrinsic mode functions (IMFs). The performances of SDC-L were evaluated with three machine learning techniques (support vector machine (SVM), k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) and random forest (RF)) and two deep learning algorithms (multilayer perceptron (MLP) and convolutional neural network (cNN)) and one hybrid deep learning algorithm combining cNN with long short term memory (LSTM) in terms of accuracy, precision, recall and F1-score. We found that the first 2 IMFs were enough to construct our feature. SVM, MLP and a hybrid deep learning algorithm (cNN plus LSTM) outperformed with SDC-L, and the other classifiers achieved equivalent results with all features. Our findings show that SDC-L is a promising feature for the classification of lung sound signals.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35551232 PMCID: PMC9098886 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-11726-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Block diagram of feature extraction.
The modified EMD algorithm.
The stopping rule: determination of K.
Figure 2The patterns of SDC-L by the diagnostic condition : Healthy, URTI, COPD on the first row, and Pneumonia and Bronchiolitis on the second row.
Experiment result: determination of K.
| K | Test results | Performance | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 score | |||
| 2 | 4.32e+08 | 0.0199** | 0.81 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.86 |
| 3 | 1.03e+14 | 0.1393 | 0.81 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.85 |
| 4 | 3.93e+09 | 0.2139 | 0.81 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.86 |
Performance comparison.
| Methods | Features | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SVM | Reference | 0.68 | 0.84 | 0.68 | 0.74 |
| SDC | 0.75 | 0.83 | 0.75 | 0.78 | |
| SDC-L | 0.81 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.85 | |
| Reference | 0.90 | 0.85 | 0.90 | 0.87 | |
| SDC | 0.90 | 0.85 | 0.90 | 0.87 | |
| SDC-L | 0.88 | 0.84 | 0.88 | 0.85 | |
| RF | Reference | 0.87 | 0.81 | 0.87 | 0.88 |
| SDC | 0.88 | 0.83 | 0.88 | 0.84 | |
| SDC-L | 0.88 | 0.80 | 0.88 | 0.84 | |
| MLP | Reference | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.89 | 0.88 |
| SDC | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.89 | 0.88 | |
| SDC-L | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.95 | |
| cNN | Reference | 0.89 | 0.82 | 0.89 | 0.85 |
| SDC | 0.85 | 0.75 | 0.85 | 0.80 | |
| SDC-L | 0.88 | 0.82 | 0.88 | 0.84 | |
| cNN + LSTM | Reference | 0.91 | 0.92 | 0.91 | 0.88 |
| SDC | 0.90 | 0.86 | 0.90 | 0.88 | |
| SDC-L | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.93 |
SVM, support vector machine; k-NN, k-nearest neighbors; RF, random forest; MLP, multi-layer perceptron; cNN, convolutionary neural network, LSTM, long short term memory.
Figure 3Performance comparison (MFCC vs. SDC vs. SDC-L).
Figure 4t-SNE patterns of Latent Features using SDC-L: The plots on the upper panel show t-SNE patterns of the latent features on the first hidden and the second hidden layers in MLP, respectively. The plot on the lower panel shows t-SNE pattern of the latent feature of cNN.