## 4 Experiments
### Experimental Results
#### 4.3.4 Results on PTB and PTB_XL  
For experimental purposes, we divided the PTB database into two non-overlapping subsets: PTB1 and PTB2. Here, the PTB1 consists of 74 patient data, whereas PTB2 consists of 90 patient data in the PTB1 \(\rightarrow\) PTB2 test case. Table 10 shows the results of each class adaptation. In the second case, PTB \(\rightarrow\) PTB_XL, we utilized all 164 patient data from the PTB database, where PTB_XL is used as a target set. Table 11 shows the detailed results of each class adaptation. Overall, both PTB1 \(\rightarrow\) PTB2 and PTB \(\rightarrow\) PTB_XL achieved an acceptable overall accuracy of 95.5% and 93.2%, respectively.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**MI-Sub Category** & **Sensitivity (\%)** & **Positive Predictivity (\%)** & **F1 Score (\%)** & **Accuracy (\%)** \\ \hline AMI & 95.5 & 89.2 & 90.7 \\ \hline ASMI & 97.2 & 93.3 & 93.0 \\ \hline IMI & 94.6 & 96.8 & 95.2 \\ \hline ALMI & 91.8 & 95.8 & 94.1 \\ \hline HC & 89.2 & 92.5 & 88.3 \\ \hline Average & 94.5 & 94.4 & 93.5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 10: Results on PTB\({}_{1}\)\(\rightarrow\) PTB\({}_{2}\), cross-patient classification task.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Task** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**N (\%)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**V (\%)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**S (\%)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**F (\%)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Accuracy (\%)**} \\ \hline  & & **Se** & **Pp** & **F1** & **Se** & **Pp** & **F1** & **Se** & **Pp** & **F1** & **Se** & **Pp** & **F1** & \\ \hline \(D_{M}\to D_{I}\) & w/o DA & 96.5 & 96.2 & 93.1 & 70.4 & 91.4 & 71.2 & 69.2 & 40.1 & 51.6 & 32.4 & 42.2 & 45.7 & 94.2 \\  & w SF-DA & 98.3 & 97.2 & 96.4 & 76.3 & 95.2 & 82.2 & 72.6 & 43.8 & 62.9 & 37.1 & 56.2 & 66.2 & **96.1** \\ \hline \(D_{M}\to D_{S}\) & w/o DA & 93.2 & 92.1 & 91.4 & 83.3 & 71.7 & 81.4 & 46.3 & 68.3 & 34.6 & 23.2 & 33.1 & 34.0 & 92.2 \\  & w SF-DA & 96.8 & 94.2 & 95.3 & 87.7 & 77.5 & 89.5 & 51.1 & 78.2 & 43.2 & 29.0 & 38.9 & 34.0 & **94.7** \\ \hline \(D_{M}\to D_{L}\) & w/o DA & 86.8 & 96.3 & 95.7 & 72.1 & 76.3 & 67.1 & 41.9 & 29.0 & 25.0 & 30.3 & 79.2 & 41.2 & 88.9 \\  & w SF-DA & 96.8 & 96.4 & 91.2 & 77.8 & 89.0 & 72.3 & 46.2 & 36.2 & 28.0 & 34.0 & 76.2 & 48.2 & **94.2** \\ \hline \(D_{I}\to D_{M}\) & w/o DA & 94.1 & 97.2 & 92.3 & 87.4 & 67.9 & 72.5 & 39.0 & 40.2 & 39.8 & 42.0 & 46.2 & 53.6 & 94.6 \\  & w SF-DA & 99.1 & 98.4 & 96.0 & 80.6 & 73.3 & 81.0 & 40.5 & 45.1 & 49.1 & 29.1 & 59.0 & 56.2 & **96.5** \\ \hline \(D_{S}\to D_{M}\) & w/o DA & 92.4 & 97.3 & 96.3 & 79.7 & 90.4 & 85.4 & 52.5 & 38.7 & 24.0 & 39.0 & 43.1 & 63.2 & 92.9 \\  & w SF-DA & 95.1 & 98.1 & 96.4 & 88.7 & 94.3 & 85.8 & 64.2 & 46.2 & 27.6 & 50.5 & 47.8 & 71.4 & **96.1** \\ \hline \(D_{L}\to D_{M}\) & w/o DA & 85.2 & 93.2 & 92.4 & 82.5 & 58.8 & 59.0 & 26.1 & 30.0 & 29.2 & 23.2 & 22.0 & 23.0 & 88.3 \\  & w SF-DA & 92.0 & 95.9 & 95.3 & 77.4 & 75.5 & 71.4 & 27.2 & 37.4 & 38.2 & 25.0 & 22.0 & 23.0 & **95.4** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: Cross-domain experimental results on each domain. Here, MITDB (\(\mathcal{D}_{M}\)), INCARTDB (\(\mathcal{D}_{I}\)), SVDB (\(\mathcal{D}_{S}\)), and LTDB (\(\mathcal{D}_{L}\)). Results without domain adaptation and with source-free adaptation are shown.