Ultra Low Power programmable biomedical SoC for on-body ECG and EEG processing

A ±6 ms‐Accuracy, 0.68 mm2, and 2.21 μW QRS Detection ASIC

“…CHIP Comparison. Thirteen QRS detection chip papers were collected in the literature review [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38], and Table 3 shows the comparison details. There existed two types for these solutions, one is system on chip (SoC) [26-28, 30, 31, 33, 35-37], the other is ASIC [29,32,34,38].…”

“…However, it is reasonable to compare the circuit design in the same process. The state-of-the-art QRS detector [34] employed advanced 65 nm technology, which derived the smallest area 0.02 mm 2 among all QRS chips [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. Besides, the database performance is very good (Se: 99.7%, +P: 99.9%).…”

“…The technology used by ECG SoC solutions [30,31,33,[35][36][37] evolved from 0.35 µm [37] to 0.18 µm [33], 0.13 µm [30,36], and 0.09 µm [31,35] in recent years. The function is powerful, even the EEG signal processing function was included [31,36]. However, with advanced technology (0.13 µm and 0.09 µm) than ours (0.18 µm), the area distribution (3.97 mm 2 to 12 mm 2 ) is still larger than ours (0.68 mm 2 ).…”

“…Three of them [30,33,35] were not seriously tested by any medical database. The other two performed well [31,36]. A recent QRS SoC design [37] that used quadratic spline wavelet transform has good performance, although the 0.35 µm technology is not very advanced.…”

“…For the purpose of long time use, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) solution of real-time and very low-power consumption should be considered. Some previous chip designs were surveyed as the comparison targets [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. We will give a detailed description for our design, which had been presented briefly in 2010 [39], in this paper.…”