Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Previously submitted to: JMIR Cardio (no longer under consideration since Mar 11, 2026)

Date Submitted: Feb 18, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Mar 3, 2025 - Apr 28, 2025
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint

Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).

Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.

Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.

Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.

Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Kolmogorov-Arnold Network-based Photoplethysmographic Peak Classification

  • Rafael Lima; 
  • Italo Sandoval; 
  • Arthur Valencio

ABSTRACT

Background:

Photoplethysmography (PPG) is an optical technique for monitoring cardiovascular activity by measuring blood volume variations in tissue beds. PPG signals contain valuable information about heart rate variability, respiratory rate, among other vital signs. Many of those metrics are derived from the interbeat interval (IBI), which is the time-difference between consecutive systolic peaks. Hence, distinguishing whether a detected PPG peak is a valid systolic peak is an essential task. Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs) are a recently proposed class of deep neural networks capable of extracting complex patterns and features from time-series data, which have not yet been evaluated for this kind of problem.

Objective:

This paper aims to apply KANs to the classification problem of systolic peaks in PPG signals. The goal is to find the architecture that minimizes the cross-entropy in this application and compare it to benchmarks such as multilayer perceptrons (MLPs). The scenarios focus on model restrictions common in wearable technologies.

Methods:

Five datasets, consisting of four pulse-PPG and one finger-PPG, were used for model training and testing. Random hyperparameter search was applied to the models, establishing the range of 1-3 hidden layers and 2-50 neurons per layer, to consider wearable limitations. A comparison with classical classifiers such as Linear Discriminant, Gradient Boosting and K-Neighbors is performed. Finally, the KAN method is compared to state-of-art rule-based PPG peak detectors: Elgendi, HeartPy, Li, and Seongsil.

Results:

Across all datasets, KANs generally outperformed MLPs for number of hidden layers n=1, exhibiting higher mean accuracies (range: 0.9185-0.9806 vs. 0.9177-0.9799), F1 scores (0.9451-0.9899 vs. 0.9447-0.9896), and AUC (0.8013-0.9635 vs. 0.7984-0.9621). At n=2, minor discrepancies appeared mainly at the fourth decimal point. Meanwhile, MLPs regained advantage at n=3, showing enhanced mean accuracies surpassing KANs in four out of five datasets (accuracy range: 0.9188-0.9808 vs. 0.9090-0.9803). Three datasets witnessed KAN outperforming classic classifiers, while MLP excelled in four instances. Evaluating against rule-based methods confirmed improvements when adopting KAN, showing best performance in three datasets, while HeartPy showed top-tier results in the remaining two.

Conclusions:

The obtained results indicate the effectiveness of KANs in accurately identifying and classifying systolic peaks, with performance superior to MLPs in scenarios of few number of layers, a restriction often imposed to wearable solutions. It also shows the best performance compared to traditional classifiers and rule-based peak detectors for most tested devices. Clinical Trial: CAAE 07327119.8.0000.5599


 Citation

Please cite as:

Lima R, Sandoval I, Valencio A

Kolmogorov-Arnold Network-based Photoplethysmographic Peak Classification

JMIR Preprints. 18/02/2025:72833

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.72833

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/72833

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.