Cited by 26Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningECG Monitoring and AnalysisSecurity and Verification in Computing

A regularization method to improve adversarial robustness of neural networks for ECG signal classification

Open access
Ma, Linhai, Liang, Liang·2022·Computers in Biology and Medicine

Abstract

With the advancement of machine leaning technologies, Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have been utilized for automated interpretation of Electrocardiogram (ECG) signals to identify potential abnormalities in a patient's heart within a second. Studies have shown that the accuracy of DNNs for ECG signal classification could reach human-expert cardiologist level if a sufficiently large training dataset is available. However, it is known that, in the field of computer vision, DNNs are not robust to adversarial noises that may cause DNNs to make wrong class-label predictions. In this work, we confirm that DNNs are not robust to adversarial noises in ECG signal classification applications, and we propose a novel regularization method to improve DNN robustness by minimizing the noise-to-signal ratio. Our method is evaluated on two public datasets: the MIT-BIH dataset and the CPSC2018 dataset, and the evaluation results show that our method can significantly enhance DNN robustness against adversarial noises generated by Projected Gradient Descent (PGD) and Smooth Adversarial Perturbation (SAP) adversarial attacks, with a minimal reduction of accuracy on clean data. Our method may serve as the baseline for designing new methods to defend against adversarial attacks for life-critical applications depending on ECG interpretation. The code of this work is publicly available at github.com/SarielMa/Robust_DNN_for_ECG.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105345

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Adversarial attacks are perturbations that maintain the visual structure of the data as close as possible to the original data, which is more suited for image and ECG than for tabular data.

    “adversarial attacks being perturbations that maintain the “visual” structure (from a human perspective) of the data as close as possible to the original data, which is more suited for image and ECG than for tabular data, for instance28,29.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ma, L., & Liang, L.
Affiliations
University of Miami (US)
Corresponding author
Liang, Liang
Venue
Computers in Biology and Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-05
Volume
144
Pages
105345
ISSN
0010-4825 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3206544595
Cited by
26
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Biology and Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
Keywords
adversarial robustness, ECG classification, deep neural network, regularization, noise-to-signal ratio, adversarial attacks, projected gradient descent, MIT-BIH arrhythmia database, automated ECG analysis, adversarial defense
MeSH terms
Electrocardiography, Humans, Thorax, Neural Networks, Computer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review