2005
DOI: 10.4015/s1016237205000482
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of Similarity Measures for Clustering of QRS Complexes

Abstract: ABSTRACT

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Along with L1, the L2 distance (both normalized with the (p2pXbeat/p2pXcentr) factor) has also been calculated and these two features, combined with the centroid-to-beat correlation coefficient, have been the main features for the similarity evaluation of the QRST complex under investigation. The significance of these selected features has been suggested by the good results obtained using K-means with the signal representation F 3 and by previous studies (Morales et al 1997, Chang et al 2005.…”
Section: Clustering By a Two-phase Ad Hoc Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Along with L1, the L2 distance (both normalized with the (p2pXbeat/p2pXcentr) factor) has also been calculated and these two features, combined with the centroid-to-beat correlation coefficient, have been the main features for the similarity evaluation of the QRST complex under investigation. The significance of these selected features has been suggested by the good results obtained using K-means with the signal representation F 3 and by previous studies (Morales et al 1997, Chang et al 2005.…”
Section: Clustering By a Two-phase Ad Hoc Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…These problems may be insignificant when only a few features of the ECG are used, but they become quite serious when the number of features becomes large. Chang et al (2005) compared the L1 and L2 distances, the normalized cross correlation and the simplified gray relational grade (SGRG) as similarity measures. MIT-BIH AD was used (excluding the four records containing paced beats) without feature extraction, using 73 samples for each QRS complex.…”
Section: Background Informationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beat classification is based on the shape and width of the QRS complex and the length of time intervals between adjacent beats. According to [11] there are two main methods for classifying beats namely, methods based on correlation with templates [12] and methods based on feature extraction [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%