aiqbench analysis
This research investigates a critical vulnerability in medical AI where convolutional neural networks rely on non-physiological artifacts rather than actual ECG waveform morphology for classification. By systematically removing or altering image features, the study exposes how models may exhibit "Clever Hans" behavior, undermining clinical trust and interpretability without addressing these shortcuts directly.
Analysis of the Shortcut Learning and Clever Hans Effect in CNN based ECG Image Classification
arXiv:2607.25117v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep learning models for ECG image classification may achieve high accuracy by exploiting non-physiological visual cues instead of ECG waveform morphology. Given the black-box nature of deep learning models, their promise of high predictive performance often remains insufficiently translated into clinical or real-world trust, interpretability, and actionable decision-making. In this study, we examine shortcut learning and Clever Hans effect in a publicly available ECG image dataset using convolutional neural networks. In process we have created six image-derived feature sets (FSs), FS1: raw full ECG images, FS2: cropped waveform-only images, FS3: waveform-masked metadata images, FS4: red-arrow artifact images for the myocardial infarction class, FS5: contrast-enhanced images for the abnormal heartbeat class and FS6: Gaussian-blurred images for the normal class. These controlled representations were used to test whether classification performance persists when waveform information is removed or when artificial class-specific artifacts are introduced. Shortcut retention score, prediction consistency and confidence divergence across Feature-Set Representations have been calculated to assess the transparency about the learning pattern. Along with factual results, average Integrated Gradients and occlusion sensitivity test results are presented to inspect whether model attribution focused on ECG-relevant waveform regions or on non-clinical artifacts. Performance changes across feature sets and attribution patterns were used to identify potential Clever Hans behavior. This study evaluates whether ECG image classifiers learn clinically meaningful morphology or shortcut cues introduced by report layout, metadata, contrast, blur, or artificial markers.
Abstract:Deep learning models for ECG image classification may achieve high accuracy by exploiting non-physiological visual cues instead of ECG waveform morphology. Given the black-box nature of deep learning models, their promise of high predictive performance often remains insufficiently translated into clinical or real-world trust, interpretability, and actionable decision-making. In this study, we examine shortcut learning and Clever Hans effect in a publicly available ECG image dataset using convolutional neural networks. In process we have created six image-derived feature sets (FSs), FS1: raw full ECG images, FS2: cropped waveform-only images, FS3: waveform-masked metadata images, FS4: red-arrow artifact images for the myocardial infarction class, FS5: contrast-enhanced images for the abnormal heartbeat class and FS6: Gaussian-blurred images for the normal class. These controlled representations were used to test whether classification performance persists when waveform information is removed or when artificial class-specific artifacts are introduced. Shortcut retention score, prediction consistency and confidence divergence across Feature-Set Representations have been calculated to assess the transparency about the learning pattern. Along with factual results, average Integrated Gradients and occlusion sensitivity test results are presented to inspect whether model attribution focused on ECG-relevant waveform regions or on non-clinical artifacts. Performance changes across feature sets and attribution patterns were used to identify potential Clever Hans behavior. This study evaluates whether ECG image classifiers learn clinically meaningful morphology or shortcut cues introduced by report layout, metadata, contrast, blur, or artificial markers.
Image and Video Processing (eess.IV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2607.25117 [eess.IV]
(or arXiv:2607.25117v1 [eess.IV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.25117 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 339 words
Related coverage

Reviewing failure modes in science as we prepare for AI researchers
LessWrong · Oct 8, 2026

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · Oct 12, 2026

Humanity’s Last Invention — Richard Socher of Recursive
Latent Space · Sep 14, 2026

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · Aug 15, 2026