ECG signal feature extraction trends in methods and applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Signal analysis is a domain which is an amalgamation of different processes coming together to form robust pipelines for the automation of data analysis. When applied to the medical world, physiological signals are used. It is becoming increasingly common in today's day and age to be working with very large datasets, on the scale of having thousands of features. This is largely due to the fact that the acquisition of biomedical signals can be taken over multi-hour timeframes, which is another challenge to solve in and of itself. This paper will focus on the electrocardiogram (ECG) signal specifically, and common feature extraction techniques used for digital health and artificial intelligence (AI) applications. Feature extraction is a vital step of biomedical signal analysis. The basic goal of feature extraction is for signal dimensionality reduction and data compaction. In simple terms, this would allow one to represent data with a smaller subset of features; these features could then later be leveraged to be used more efficiently for machine learning and deep learning models for applications, such as classification, detection, and automated applications. In addition, the redundant data in the overall dataset is filtered out as the data is reduced during feature extraction. In this review, we cover ECG signal processing and feature extraction in the time domain, frequency domain, time-frequency domain, decomposition, and sparse domain. We also provide pseudocode for the methods discussed so that they can be replicated by practitioners and researchers in their specific areas of biomedical work. Furthermore, we discuss deep features, and machine learning integration, to complete the overall pipeline design for signal analysis. Finally, we discuss future work that can be innovated upon in the feature extraction domain for ECG signal analysis.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
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".