Comparison of Wavelet Types and Thresholding Methods on Wavelet Based Denoising of Heart Sounds
Copyright © 2013 SciRes. JSIP
167
(a)
(b)
Figure 3. The SNR values after denoising before denoising
for level 5 and 8.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Figure 4. The denoised signal using four different threshold
rules at eighth level.
4. Conclusions
The wavelet denoising techniques were studied on a
noised PCG signal in this work. The performances of
several variations of denoising including thresholding
rules and the type of wavelet were compared to produce
the best denoising results of the methods.
We conclude that reasonable decomposition level is
bsolutely depending on the sampling frequency and the
frequency band of the signal. Just in this study, the de-
composition level of 5 produced reasonable results be-
cause the frequency band of a normal PCG signal is
around 150 - 200 Hz and the sampling frequency is 11.5
KHz. Since the noise level method is one of the impor-
tant parameter in wavelet denoising, it is examined for
different levels. We have not seen any noteworthy dif-
ferences in the methods from level 1 to level 6. After this
level, rigresure method has showed superiority to the
other methods in terms of SNR level. Consequently, it is
determined that the wavelet type is not very important if
the oscillation number is not very low, th e decomposition
level is absolutely depends on the frequency band of the
PCG signal and its sampling frequency, and rigresure
method is best of the noise estimation techniques.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Akay, J. L. Semmlow, W. Welkowitz, M.D. Bauer
and J. B. Kostis, “Detection of Coronnary Occlusion Us-
ing Autoregressive Modeling Diastolic Heart Sounds,”
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 37,
1990, pp. 336-273.doi:10.1109/10.52343
[2] L.G. Durand, M. Blanchard, G. Cloutier, H. N. Sabbah
and P.D. Stein, “Comparison of Pattern Recognition Me-
thods for Computer-Assisted Classification of Spectra of
Heart Sounds in Patient with Porcine Bioprosthetic Valve
Implanted in the Mitral Position,” IEEE Transactions on
Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 37, 1990, pp.
1121-1129.doi:10.1109/10.64456
[3] B. Ergen and Y. Tatar, “The Analysis of Heart Sounds
Based on Linear and High Order Statistical Methods,”
Proceedings of the 23rd Annual EMBS International Con-
ferences, 2001, pp. 2139-2141.
[4] P. E. Tikkanen, “Nonlinear Wavelet and Wavelet Packet
Denoising of Electrocardiogram Signal,” Biological Cy-
bernetics, Springer-Verlag, 1999.
[5] S. G. Mallat, “A Theory for Multiresolution Signal De-
composition: The Wavelet Representation,” IEEE Trans-
actions on Pattern Anal. And Mach. Int., Vol. 11, No. 7,
1989, pp. 674-693.
[6] O. Rioul, “Discrete-Time Multiresolution Theory,” IEEE
Trans. on Signal Processing, Vol. 41, No. 8, 1993, pp.
2591-2605. doi:10.1109/78.229891
[7] E. Erçelebi, “Electrocardiogram Signals Denoising Using
Lifting Based Discrete Wavelet Transform,” Comp. in
Biol. and Med., Vol. 34, 2004, pp. 479-493.
doi:10.1016/S0010-4825(03)00090-8
[8] H. F. C-Greiff, R. R-Garcia and J. V. L-Ginori, “Signal
De-noising in Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Using
Wavelet Transforms,” Vol.14, No. 6, 2002, pp. 388-401.
[9] A. Effern, K. Lehnertz, T. Schreiber, T. Grundwald, P.
David and C. E. Elger, “Nonlinear Denoising of Transient
Signals with Application to Event-related Potentials,”
Physica, Vol. 140, 2000, pp. 257-266.
a