Evaluates the classification accuracy and energy efficiency of a hardware-aware spiking neural network (SNN) for real-time ECG beat detection and categorization. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MIT-BIH, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill mit-bih-ecg-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mit Bih Ecg Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-mit-bih-ecg-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: mit-bih-ecg-eval
description: Evaluates the classification accuracy and energy efficiency of a hardware-aware spiking neural network (SNN) for real-time ECG beat detection and categorization. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MIT-BIH, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2406.06543
bibtex_key: yan2024sparrowsnn
confidence: high
---
# mit-bih-ecg-eval
> SparrowSNN: A Hardware/software Co-design for Energy Efficient ECG Classification — Yan et al. (2024) (arXiv:2406.06543, 2024)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the classification accuracy and energy efficiency of a hardware-aware spiking neural network (SNN) for real-time ECG beat detection and categorization.
## Datasets
- **MIT-BIH** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1), online (-1)
## Metrics
- `Accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correctly classified heartbeats out of the total test set.
- `Sensitivity (Se)` — range: percent
- True Positive Rate: TP / (TP + FN).
- `Positive Predictivity (P+)` — range: percent
- Precision: TP / (TP + FP).
- `Energy per inference` — range: nJ
- Total energy consumed per heartbeat classification, calculated from dynamic/static power, memory read/write energy, and leakage over the inference cycle count.
## Input / output format
**Input**: 180-sample ECG window centered on an R-peak, normalized to [0, 1].
**Output**: One of four class labels (N, SVEB, VEB, F) and associated energy/power metrics.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def evaluate(predictions, gold):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if p == g)
accuracy = correct / len(gold)
tp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if p == g == 'N')
fn = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if p != g and g == 'N')
fp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if p != g and p == 'N')
se = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0
pp = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0
return accuracy, se, pp
```
## Common pitfalls
- Energy estimates are tightly coupled to the 22nm ASIC synthesis and 4MHz clock frequency, making direct comparisons with other works at different nodes or frequencies misleading.
- Training data is heavily augmented with SMOTE to balance classes, which inflates training set size but does not reflect real-world class imbalance.
- Patient-specific online training uses 20% of a patient's data for fine-tuning, which is not available in standard zero-shot or fully supervised benchmarks.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We evaluate the performance before and after per-patient fine-tuning using two key metrics: sensitivity (Se) and positive predictivity (P+) [6], with calculations detailed below: Se = TP / (TP + FN); P+ = TP / (TP + FP). where TP FN and FP indicate true positive, false negative and false positive. ... The overall accuracy of the SNN has increased by 1.57%.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{yan2024sparrowsnn,
title={SparrowSNN: A Hardware/software Co-design for Energy Efficient ECG Classification},
author={Yan et al. (2024)},
year={2024},
note={arXiv:2406.06543}
}
```
- arXiv: 2406.06543
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!