Table of Contents
Fetching ...

How to evaluate your medical time series classification?

Yihe Wang, Taida Li, Yujun Yan, Wenzhan Song, Xiang Zhang

TL;DR

This comprehensive analysis aims to establish clearer guidelines for evaluating MedTS models in different healthcare applications by demonstrating step-by-step how subject-dependent utilizes subject-specific features as a shortcut for classification and leads to a deceptive high performance, suggesting that the subject-independent setup is more precise and practicable evaluation setup in real-world.

Abstract

Medical time series (MedTS) play a critical role in many healthcare applications, such as vital sign monitoring and the diagnosis of brain and heart diseases. However, the existence of subject-specific features poses unique challenges in MedTS evaluation. Inappropriate evaluation setups that either exploit or overlook these features can lead to artificially inflated classification performance (by up to 50% in accuracy on ADFTD dataset): this concern has received little attention in current research. Here, we categorize the existing evaluation setups into two primary categories: subject-dependent and subject-independent. We show the subject-independent setup is more appropriate for different datasets and tasks. Our theoretical analysis explores the feature components of MedTS, examining how different evaluation setups influence the features that a model learns. Through experiments on six datasets (spanning EEG, ECG, and fNIRS modalities) using four different methods, we demonstrate step-by-step how subject-dependent utilizes subject-specific features as a shortcut for classification and leads to a deceptive high performance, suggesting that the subject-independent setup is more precise and practicable evaluation setup in real-world. This comprehensive analysis aims to establish clearer guidelines for evaluating MedTS models in different healthcare applications. Code to reproduce this work in \url{https://github.com/DL4mHealth/MedTS_Evaluation}.

How to evaluate your medical time series classification?

TL;DR

This comprehensive analysis aims to establish clearer guidelines for evaluating MedTS models in different healthcare applications by demonstrating step-by-step how subject-dependent utilizes subject-specific features as a shortcut for classification and leads to a deceptive high performance, suggesting that the subject-independent setup is more precise and practicable evaluation setup in real-world.

Abstract

Medical time series (MedTS) play a critical role in many healthcare applications, such as vital sign monitoring and the diagnosis of brain and heart diseases. However, the existence of subject-specific features poses unique challenges in MedTS evaluation. Inappropriate evaluation setups that either exploit or overlook these features can lead to artificially inflated classification performance (by up to 50% in accuracy on ADFTD dataset): this concern has received little attention in current research. Here, we categorize the existing evaluation setups into two primary categories: subject-dependent and subject-independent. We show the subject-independent setup is more appropriate for different datasets and tasks. Our theoretical analysis explores the feature components of MedTS, examining how different evaluation setups influence the features that a model learns. Through experiments on six datasets (spanning EEG, ECG, and fNIRS modalities) using four different methods, we demonstrate step-by-step how subject-dependent utilizes subject-specific features as a shortcut for classification and leads to a deceptive high performance, suggesting that the subject-independent setup is more precise and practicable evaluation setup in real-world. This comprehensive analysis aims to establish clearer guidelines for evaluating MedTS models in different healthcare applications. Code to reproduce this work in \url{https://github.com/DL4mHealth/MedTS_Evaluation}.
Paper Structure (28 sections, 1 equation, 2 figures, 7 tables)

This paper contains 28 sections, 1 equation, 2 figures, 7 tables.

Figures (2)

  • Figure 1: Types of MedTS Datasets. S and C denote subject and class, respectively.
  • Figure 2: Types of MedTS Evaluation Setups. (a) This diagram shows the two main evaluation setups and their sub-types, (b) This figure adopted from wang2024contrast shows the differences between the two main setups: subject-dependent and subject-independent.