Benchmark Problems and Benchmark Datasets for the evaluation of Machine and Deep Learning methods on Photoplethysmography signals: the D4 report from the QUMPHY project
Authors: Urs Hackstein, Jordi Alastruey, Philip Aston, Ciaran Bench, Peter H. Charlton, Loic Coquelin, Nando Hegemann, Vaidotas Marozas, Mohammad Moulaeifard, Manasi Nandi, Andrius Petrenas, Oskar Pfeffer, Mantas Rinkevicius, Andrius Solosenko, Nils Strodthoff, Sara Vardanega
Organizations: Technische Hochschule Mittelhessen - University of Applied Sciences, Giessen, Germany · King’s College London, London, United Kingdom · National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, United Kingdom · University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom · Laboratoire National de M´etrologie et d’Essais, Paris, France · Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Berlin, Germany · Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania · Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany
This report is part of the Qumphy project (22HLT01 Qumphy) that is funded by the European Union and is dedicated to the development of measures to quantify the uncertainties associated with Machine Learning algorithms applied to medical problems, in particular the analysis and processing of Photoplethysmography (PPG) signals. In this report, a list of six medical problems that are related to PPG signals and serve as Benchmark Problems is given. Suitable Benchmark datasets and their usage are described also.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: An exemplary photoplethysmogram (PPG) signal showing a pulse wave for each heartbeat. Pulse onsets, representing individual heartbeats, are shown as red circles. An inter-beat interval is labelled, corresponding to the time between consecutive heartbeats. Adapted from [ 1 ] by Peter H. Charlton - Own work, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Photoplethysmogram_(PPG)_signal.png
Figure 2: The example of (a) arterial blood pressure (ABP) segment with labeled fiducial points (systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure) and (b) PPG segment.
Figure 3: The example of (a) ECG segment and (b) PPG segment with atrial fibrillation from TriggersAF dataset.
Figure 4: The example of (a) ECG segment and (b) PPG segment with premature beats and tachycardia from TriggersAF dataset.
Total: 1100 : 557M, 543F (49.4%F)
Non Elevated
Elevated
Hypertensive
213 (19.4%)
645 (58.6%)
241 (21.9%)
73M / 140 F (65.7%F)
337M / 308F (47.8%F)
146M / 95F (39.4%F)
CVD
no cvd
cvd
no cvd
cvd
no cvd
cvd
172 (76.5%)
53 (23.5%)
374 (59.0%)
260 (41.0%)
77 (32.0%)
164 (68%)
Gender
51 / 114
22 / 26
189 / 191
148 / 117
53 / 24
93 / 71
Table 1: Population characteristics for the BP classification and regression cohort - HW: Healthy Weight, OW: Overweight, OB: Obese. Age, weight and height are expressed as mean ± standard deviation.
Total: 546
< 30
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Age group
57
205
146
118
16
4
(10.4%)
(37.5%)
(26.7%)
(21.7%)
(3.0%)
(0.7%)
Height (m)
1.70 ± 0.10
1.71 ± 0.10
1.71 ± 0.10
1.70 ± 0.09
1.69 ± 0.09
1.72 ± 0.10
Weight (Kg)
70.41 ± 15.21
82.49 ± 21.44
81.59 ± 19.65
79.42 ± 18.65
70.32 ± 9.28
75.40 ± 16.39
SBP
114.16 ± 10.55
117.34 ± 10.53
118.38 ± 10.11
118.90 ± 10.49
125.49 ± 11.66
131.66 ± 5.68
Table 2: Population characteristics for the age regression cohort - HW: Healthy Weight, OW: Overweight, OB: Obese. Age, weight, height, SBP and DBP are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. SBP and SBP values referred here are the ”baseline_sbp” and ”baseline_dbp” values used to divide the population into BP classes.
Figure 5: The changes of signals during sleep apnea episodes: (a) respiratory airflow, (b) finger PPG signal, (c) arterial blood oxygen saturation, SpO2, and heart rate, HR.
Figure 6: Idealised respiratory modulations of the PPG (left) and ECG (right). From top: no modulation, baseline wander (BW), amplitude modulation (AM), and frequency modulation (FM). Adapted from [ 65 ] and [ 66 ] by Peter H. Charlton - Own work, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=104501363
This Good Practice Guide presents work done in the QUMPHY project (Uncertainty quantification for machine learning models applied to photoplethysmography signals) that considered both machine learning and uncertainty quantification for problems which used photoplethysmography (PPG) signals from wearable devices as input. It provides high-level guidance on what types of machine learning model might be used and how different models compare when applied to both regression and classification tasks. It provides guidance on the implementation of different methods for uncertainty quantification, covering both model-dependent and model-independent techniques, and on the validation of the results provided by those methods. It also describes six benchmark problems together with pointers to different benchmark datasets for each problem. Software is described that can assist practitioners in implementing the methods described herein and there is a brief consideration of ethical issues. It concludes with a summary and recommendations.
Photoplethysmography (PPG) is increasingly recorded by wearable and clinical devices at enormous scale, and a growing number of PPG foundation models (FMs) have been developed to compute reusable representations for various downstream tasks. These models are difficult to compare: different evaluations use different datasets, task definitions, preprocessing, downstream heads, hyperparameter tuning, and baselines. We present PPG-Bench, a unifying open-source benchmark evaluating five public PPG FMs across nine open-access datasets and 26 tasks spanning cardiovascular state estimation, activity, sleep, screening, and identification. We evaluate models under four downstream regimes of increasing adaptability (linear probing, random forests, frozen MLP probes, and end-to-end finetuning), with model-specific hyperparameter optimization and subject-disjoint cross-validation. We also evaluate against three controls: random/constant baseline, a deterministic pulse-rate-variability (PRV) feature set, and a generic time-series FM (MOMENT). Across all 68 task-regime combinations, 35.3% show no meaningful FM advantage over the random/constant baseline, and in 83.8% no PPG-specific FM outperforms both PRV and MOMENT. We also find that added downstream head capacity generally improves performance, but can cause significant degradation if the model is performing at chance/constant level. Current PPG FMs therefore cannot yet claim to provide generalised and transferrable representations of PPG signals, and future evaluation in this field should include checks against simple, non-learned controls. Code for the benchmark and instructions to evaluate more models can be found here - https://github.com/mannas-ai/ppg-bench.
Photoplethysmography (PPG) is one of the most widely captured biosignals for clinical prediction tasks, yet PPG-based algorithms are typically trained on small-scale datasets of uncertain quality, which hinders meaningful algorithm comparisons. We present a comprehensive benchmark for PPG-based clinical prediction using the \dbname~dataset, establishing baselines across the full spectrum of clinically relevant applications: multi-class heart rhythm classification, and regression of physiological parameters including respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and blood pressure (BP). Most notably, we provide the first comprehensive assessment of PPG for general arrhythmia detection beyond atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFLT), with performance stratified by BP, HR, and demographic subgroups. Using established deep learning architectures, we achieved strong performance for AF detection (AUROC = 0.96) and accurate physiological parameter estimation (RR MAE: 2.97 bpm; HR MAE: 1.13 bpm; SBP/DBP MAE: 16.13/8.70 mmHg). Cross-dataset validation demonstrates excellent generalizability for AF detection (AUROC = 0.97), while clinical subgroup analysis reveals marked performance differences across subgroups by BP, HR, and demographic strata. These variations appear to reflect population-specific waveform differences rather than systematic bias in model behavior. This framework establishes the first integrated benchmark for multi-task PPG-based clinical prediction, demonstrating that PPG signals can effectively support multiple simultaneous monitoring tasks and providing essential baselines for future algorithm development.
Mohammad Moulaeifard, Philip J. Aston, Peter H. Charlton +1
AI4Health Department, Oldenburg University, Oldenburg, Germany · Department of Data Science and AI, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, United Kingdom · School of Mathematics and Physics, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom +1