mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Shift-Invariant Feature Attribution in the Application of Wireless Electrocardiograms

arXiv 2603.20462 ↗First posted 20 Mar 2026eess.SP cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Assigning relevance scores to the input features of a machine learning model enables to measure the contributions of the features in achieving a correct outcome. It is regarded as one of the approaches towards developing explainable models. For biomedical assignments, this is very useful for medical experts to comprehend machine-based decisions. In the analysis of electro cardiogram (ECG) signals, in particular, understanding which of the electrocardiogram samples or features contributed most for a given decision amounts to understanding the underlying cardiac phases or conditions the machine tries to explain. For the computation of relevance scores, determining the proper baseline is important. Moreover, the scores should have a distribution which is at once intuitive to interpret and easy to associate with the underline cardiac reality. The purpose of this work is to achieve these goals. Specifically, we propose a shift-invariant baseline which has a physical significance in the analysis as well as interpretation of electrocardiogram measurements. Moreover, we aggregate significance scores in such a way that they can be mapped to cardiac phases. We demonstrate our approach by inferring physical exertion from cardiac exertion using a residual network. We show that the ECG samples which achieved the highest relevance scores (and, therefore, which contributed most to the accurate recognition of the physical exertion) are those associated with the P and T waves. Index Terms Attribution, baseline, cardiovascular diseases, electrocardiogram, activity recognition, machine learning

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Mar 2026.

Builds on

13 of 32 references.

References · 13

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  3. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  4. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
  5. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,278
  6. 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 341
  7. 2022Algorithms to estimate Shapley value feature attributionscited by 114
  8. 2021Do Feature Attribution Methods Correctly Attribute Features?cited by 98
  9. 2021The effectiveness of feature attribution methods and its correlation with automatic evaluation scorescited by 87
  10. 2024IG2: Integrated Gradient on Iterative Gradient Path for Feature Attributioncited by 12
  11. 2022Analysis of a Deep Learning Model for 12-Lead ECG Classification Reveals Learned Features Similar to Diagnostic Criteriacited by 11
  12. 2023ECG Feature Importance Rankings: Cardiologists vs. Algorithmscited by 3
1 more
  1. 2020Inferring ECG from PPG for Continuous Cardiac Monitoring Using Lightweight Neural Networkcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.