Detecting Noisy ECG QRS Complexes Using WaveletCNN Autoencoder and ConvLSTM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a novel machine learning pipeline to detect QRS complexes in very noisy wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) devices. The machine learning pipeline consists of a Butterworth filter, two wavelet convolutional neural networks (WaveletCNNs) autoencoders, an optional QRS complex inverter, a Monte Carlo k-nearest neighbours (k-NN), and a convolutional long short-term memory (ConvLSTM). WaveletCNN autoencoders filter out electrode contact noise, instrumentation noise, and motion artifact noise by using the advantages of wavelet filters and convolutional neural networks. The QRS complex inverter flips inverted QRS complexes. Monte Carlo k-NN performs automatic gain control on the ECG signals in order to normalize it. The ConvLSTM executes the final QRS complex detection by using the power of a convolutional neural network and a long short-term memory. The MIT-BIH, the European ST-T, and the Long Term ST database Noise Stress Test databases provide the training and testing ECG recordings. The proposed machine learning pipeline performs 3 standard deviations better than the state of the art QRS complex detection algorithms in terms of F1score for very noisy environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".