While Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) show promising performance in automated electrocardiogram interpretation, it remains unclear whether they genuinely perform actual step-by-step reasoning or just rely on superficial visual cues. To investigate this, we introduce ECG-Reasoning-Benchmark, a novel multi-turn evaluation framework comprising over 6,400 samples to systematically assess step-by-step reasoning across 17 core ECG diagnoses. Our comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art models reveals a critical failure in executing multi-step logical deduction. Although models possess the medical knowledge to retrieve clinical criteria for a diagnosis, they exhibit near-zero success rates (6% Completion) in maintaining a complete reasoning chain, primarily failing to ground the corresponding ECG findings to the actual visual evidence in the ECG signal. These results demonstrate that current MLLMs bypass actual visual interpretation, exposing a critical flaw in existing training paradigms and underscoring the necessity for robust, reasoning-centric medical AI. The code and data are available at https://github.com/Jwoo5/ecg-reasoning-benchmark.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: End-to-end schematic of the Automated ECG Analysis Pipeline. The workflow illustrates a systematic progression: from the initial delineation of fundamental waveforms in the raw signal to the quantification of physiological features, which are then mapped into discrete clinical findings and ultimately resulting in a definitive diagnostic conclusion.
Figure 2: An illustrative example of the 4-step recursive evaluation loop for diagnosing Complete Left Bundle Branch Block. The process begins with an Initial Diagnostic Question, followed by the verification of necessary findings. The figure depicts the first loop, which verifies the presence of “Prolonged QRS duration” grounded in the wave segment and measurement range, and the fourth loop, which confirms the “Notched R wave in lateral leads” with specific lead and wave grounding.
Source Dataset
Model
IDA (%)
Completion (%)
Depth (0-4)
GT-RDA (%)
PTB-XL
PULSE (7B) Liu et al. (2024)
80.93
5.45
1.24
35.18
GEM (7B) Lan et al. (2025)
84.37
6.13
1.34
65.66
ECG-R1-SFT (8B) Jin et al. (2026)
85.12
5.45
1.80
21.76
ECG-R1-RL (8B) Jin et al. (2026)
85.41
5.90
1.79
22.70
OpenTSLM (3B) Langer et al. (2025)
54.77
0.65
0.17
37.58
Hulu-Med (7B) Jiang et al. (2025)
55.87
4.96
1.20
86.87
Table 1: Quantitative benchmark results of the evaluated models on ECG-Reasoning-Benchmark across both PTB-XL and MIMIC-IV-ECG source datasets. Models are grouped into ECG-specific, medical domain, general domain, and proprietary categories, with the highest score for each metric highlighted in bold within its respective source dataset.
Appendix figures & tables22 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
Metric
P Wave
QRS Complex
T Wave
P Onset
P Offset
QRS Onset
QRS Offset
T Onset
T Offset
ecgpuwave Goldberger et al. (2000)
Recall
0.872±0.013
0.872±0.013
0.993±0.003
0.992±0.003
0.890±0.008
0.848±0.010
Precision
0.818±0.029
0.821±0.030
0.998±0.002
0.997±0.002
0.983±0.008
0.911±0.001
NeuroKit2 Makowski et al. (2021)
Recall
0.969±0.005
0.967±0.006
0.861±0.011
0.796±0.017
0.781±0.018
0.722±0.011
Precision
0.762±0.040
0.762±0.038
0.854±0.012
0.789±0.018
0.908±0.018
0.836±0.024
UNet3+ Joung et al. (2024)
Recall
0.972±0.004
0.972±0.004
0.999±0.001
0.999±0.001
0.983±0.006
0.981±0.006
Appendix
Table 2: Quantitative performances for the ECG segmentation task. The evaluation was conducted on the LUDB dataset Kalyakulina et al. (2020) . Mean and 95% confidence interval are shown across 3 different train, validation, and test splits. We followed the recommendations of the Association for Medical Instrumentation Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (1999) , where it is considered that an onset or an offset is detected correctly if their deviation from the GT annotations does not exceed in the tolerance of 150 ms.
Figure 3: Comparison of P wave detection before (top) and after (bottom) post-processing. Shaded backgrounds indicate GT annotations, while colored signals show predictions. Our pipeline correctly identifies the unannotated P waves (circled), which are penalized as False Positives due to the missing GT.
Figure 4: Prevalence of diagnostic labels in the PTB-XL (left) and MIMIC-IV-ECG (right) datasets. Diagnoses directly covered by the 17 core logic diagrams of ECG-Reasoning-Benchmark are highlighted in coral, while conditions that can be indirectly derived from these core diagnoses are highlighted in light coral.
Source Dataset
PTB-XL
MIMIC-IV-ECG
# of Unique ECGs
2,868
3,316
# of Cases (Multi-turn)
+
1,377
1,655
−
1,707
1,704
# of Total QA pairs
24,097
27,025
Avg. reasoning turns
7.81
8.05
Appendix
Table 3: Overall statistics of ECG-Reasoning-Benchmark derived from the PTB-XL and MIMIC-IV-ECG datasets
# Reasoning
PTB-XL
MIMIC-IV-ECG
Dx
Paths
# Cases
# Per Reasoning Path
# Cases
# Per Reasoning Path
1AVB
+
1
100
100
100
100
−
2
100
11 | 89
100
50 | 50
2AVB
+
1
3
3
49
49
−
2
100
50 | 50
100
50 | 50
3AVB
+
2
9
0 | 9
100
50 | 50
Appendix
Table 4: Detailed case distribution for the 17 core diagnoses in ECG-Reasoning-Benchmark . The table outlines the total number of positive ( + ) and negative ( − ) cases, the number of distinct reasoning paths for each outcome, and the specific stratification of cases across these paths for both PTB-XL and MIMIC-IV-ECG source datasets.
Figure 5: System prompt provided to the evaluated models
Figure 6: Logic diagram for First Degree AV Block (1AVB)
Figure 7: Logic diagram for Second Degree AV Block (2AVB)
Figure 8: Logic diagram for Third Degree AV Block (3AVB)
Figure 9: Logic diagram for Complete Left Bundle Branch Block (CLBBB)
Figure 10: Logic diagram for Complete Right Bundle Branch Block (CRBBB)
Figure 11: Logic diagram for Left Anterior Fascicular Block (LAFB)
Figure 12: Logic diagram for Left Posterior Fascicular Block (LPFB)
Figure 13: Logic diagram for Left Ventricular Hypertrophy (LVH)
Figure 14: Logic diagram for Right Ventricular Hypertrophy (RVH)
Figure 15: Logic diagram for Premature Atrial Complex (PAC) and Premature Ventricular Complex (PVC)
Figure 16: Logic diagram for Anterior Myocardial Infarction (AMI)
Figure 17: Logic diagram for Inferior Myocardial Infarction (IMI)
Figure 18: Logic diagram for Lateral Myocardial Infarction (LMI)
Figure 19: Logic diagram for Anterior Ischemia (ISCAN)
Figure 20: Logic diagram for Inferior Ischemia (ISCIN)
Figure 21: Logic diagram for Lateral Ischemia (ISCLA)
While multimodal large language models offer a promising solution to the "black box" nature of health AI by generating interpretable reasoning traces, verifying the validity of these traces remains a critical challenge. Existing evaluation methods are either unscalable, relying on manual clinician review, or superficial, utilizing proxy metrics (e.g. QA) that fail to capture the semantic correctness of clinical logic. In this work, we introduce a reproducible framework for evaluating reasoning in ECG signals. We propose decomposing reasoning into two distinct, components: (i) Perception, the accurate identification of patterns within the raw signal, and (ii) Deduction, the logical application of domain knowledge to those patterns. To evaluate Perception, we employ an agentic framework that generates code to empirically verify the temporal structures described in the reasoning trace. To evaluate Deduction, we measure the alignment of the model's logic against a structured database of established clinical criteria in a retrieval-based approach. This dual-verification method enables the scalable assessment of "true" reasoning capabilities.
Maxwell A. Xu, Harish Haresamudram, Catherine W. Liu +11
University of Illinois Urbana Champaign · Google Inc · Rush University +4
Electrocardiogram (ECG) diagnosis in clinical practice relies on structured reasoning over multiple hierarchical aspects, including cardiac rhythm, conduction properties, waveform morphology, and overall diagnostic impression. However, most existing approaches predict labels directly from ECG signals without explicit clinical reasoning, resulting in opaque decisions that lack clinical alignment. To bridge this gap, we propose CardioThink, a physician-inspired multimodal large language model (MLLM) framework that explicitly models the diagnostic reasoning process through human-interpretable intermediate stages (rhythm, conduction, morphology, and impression) to derive final classification results. Furthermore, we introduce Structured Set Policy Optimization (SSPO) to jointly optimize adherence to this structured reasoning format and the accuracy of variable-size diagnostic sets, without requiring manually annotated reasoning traces. Extensive experiments on diverse ECG benchmarks demonstrate the significant superiority of our approach in diagnostic accuracy, while simultaneously providing interpretable clinical reasoning. Notably, reasoning quality evaluations confirm that SSPO substantially enhances the clinical validity of the generated rationales. These findings reveal that moving beyond direct label prediction toward structured reasoning offers a more clinically aligned direction for future ECG modeling.
Yang Wu, Xiaoyan Yuan, Hau-San Wong +1
1City University of Hong Kong · 2Beijing Institute of Technology · 3Shenzhen MSU-BIT University
Cardiologists interpret electrocardiograms by localizing waveform components, measuring rhythm and interval patterns, and translating these structured observations into diagnostic evidence. Whether this expert reading process can serve as an effective prior for ECG agents remains unclear. To address this question, we introduce LuminaECG, a clinically structured ECG reasoning framework that reformulates ECG interpretation as measurement-grounded visual reading. ECG signals are rendered on standard electrocardiographic grid paper to preserve the spatial and scale cues used in clinical reading. P-wave, QRS-complex, and T-wave boundaries are explicitly delineated, and color-coded segmentation decomposes the waveform into discrete visual measurement primitives. A general 2B vision-language backbone is then trained with low-rank supervised fine-tuning to associate these primitives with diagnostic reasoning, without architectural modification. Across open, proprietary, and ECG-specialist zero-shot baselines, LuminaECG improves both waveform measurement and diagnostic recovery. It reaches a clinically meaningful reader tier on the CODE-test benchmark, transfers across geographically diverse ECG datasets without retraining, and generates reports whose structure contains an emergent prognostic signal. These findings suggest that effective ECG agents require not only larger models, but supervision that preserves the alignment between measurable waveform evidence and clinical knowledge.
Hongxiang Gao, He-yang Xu, Yuwen Li +6
State Key Laboratory of Digital Medical Engineering, Southeast University · School of Instrument Science and Engineering, Southeast University