Papers › Impact of ECG Dataset Diversity on Generalization of CNN Model for Detecting QRS Complex

Impact of ECG Dataset Diversity on Generalization of CNN Model for Detecting QRS Complex

10 Jul 2019IEEE Access 2019 7archive 2025-07-28

Ahsan Habib, Chandan Karmakar, John Yearwood

Detection of QRS complexes in electrocardiogram (ECG) signal is crucial for automated cardiac diagnosis. Automated QRS detection has been a research topic for over three decades and several of the traditional QRS detection methods show acceptable detection accuracy, however, the applicability of these methods beyond their study-specific databases was not explored. The non-stationary nature of ECG and signal variance of intra and inter-patient recordings impose significant challenges on single QRS detectors to achieve reasonable performance. In real life, a promising QRS detector may be expected to achieve acceptable accuracy over diverse ECG recordings and, thus, investigation of the model's generalization capability is crucial. This paper investigates the generalization capability of convolutional neural network (CNN) based-models from intra (subject wise leave-one-out and five-fold cross validation) and inter-database (training with single and multiple databases) points-of-view over three publicly available ECG databases, namely MIT-BIH Arrhythmia, INCART, and QT. Leave-one-out test accuracy reports 99.22%, 97.13%, and 96.25% for these databases accordingly and inter-database tests report more than 90% accuracy with the single exception of INCART. The performance variation reveals the fact that a CNN model's generalization capability does not increase simply by adding more training samples, rather the inclusion of samples from a diverse range of subjects is necessary for reasonable QRS detection accuracy.

PaperPDF

Code

No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

DiversityElectrocardiography (ECG)QRS Complex Detection

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
QRS Complex Detection INCART CNN (LOSO, Intra-Db) Accuracy 97.85% #1 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection INCART CNN (MIT-BIH) Accuracy 91.65% #2 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection INCART CNN (MIT-BIH + QT) Accuracy 90.54% #3 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection INCART CNN (QT) Accuracy 86.3% #4 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (LOSO, Intra-Db) Accuracy 99.60% #1 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (LOSO, Intra-Db) F1-score - #1 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (INCART + QT) Accuracy 97.5% #3 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (INCART + QT) F1-score - #3 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (INCART) Accuracy 97.49% #4 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (INCART) F1-score - #4 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (QT) Accuracy 96.6% #5 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection MIT-BIH AR CNN (QT) F1-score - #5 of 5 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection QT CNN (LOSO, Intra-Db) Accuracy 97.42% #1 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection QT CNN (MIT-BIH) Accuracy 96.6% #2 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection QT CNN (MIT-BIH+INCART) Accuracy 94.48% #3 of 4 Archive leaderboard report
QRS Complex Detection QT CNN (INCART) Accuracy 94.39% #4 of 4 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections