Table 4 The performance of the proposed method compared to previous methods on the MIT-BIH dataset.
Methods | Acc(%) | N | S | V | Q | F | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | Se | PPV | F1 | Se | PPV | F1 | Se | PPV | F1 | Se | PPV | F1 | Se | PPV | ||
Lin et al.33 | 99.2 | .962 | .973 | .951 | .908 | .905 | .911 | .982 | .985 | .979 | – | – | – | .991 | .983 | 1.00 |
Oliveira et al.34 | 95.3 | .974 | .971 | .978 | .916 | .761 | .566 | .950 | .930 | .950 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Chen et al.35 | 93.1 | .969 | .984 | .954 | .334 | .295 | .384 | .773 | .708 | .851 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Kung et al.36 | 98.6 | – | – | – | .815 | .754 | .887 | .970 | .967 | .974 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Ince et al.37 | 98.3 | – | – | – | .581 | .635 | .537 | .860 | .846 | .874 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Shi et al.38 | 94.2 | .971 | .953 | .989 | .627 | .907 | .479 | .885 | .929 | .845 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Xie et al.39 | 96.5 | .900 | .943 | .877 | .848 | .797 | .906 | .966 | .971 | .962 | – | – | – | .816 | .908 | .741 |
Zhai et al.40 | 96.1 | .899 | .879 | .920 | .754 | .768 | .740 | .931 | .938 | .924 | – | – | – | .700 | .624 | .796 |
Feiyan et al.32 | 99.6 | .999 | .999 | .999 | .973 | .980 | .966 | .990 | .991 | .989 | – | – | – | .924 | .907 | .942 |
Proposed | 99.6 | .997 | .988 | .991 | .997 | .997 | .997 | .993 | .994 | .991 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |