Table 2: Comparison of the Proposed Method Segmentation Results with State of the Art Methods [¹¹, ⁴³]

Study Case	TPR			PPV
	Souplet et al. 2008 [43]	Geremia et al. 2010 [11]	Proposed Method	Souplet et al. 2008 [43]	Geremia et al. 2010 [11]	Proposed Method
CHB_train_Case01	0.22	0.49	0.73	0.41	0.64	0.48
CHB_train_Case02	0.18	0.44	0.02	0.29	0.63	0.56
CHB_train_Case03	0.17	0.22	0.14	0.21	0.57	0.06
CHB_train_Case04	0.12	0.31	0.48	0.55	0.78	0.04
CHB_train_Case05	0.22	0.4	0.44	0.42	0.52	0.10
CHB_train_Case06	0.13	0.32	0.15	0.46	0.52	0.42
CHB_train_Case07	0.13	0.4	0.29	0.39	0.54	0.54
CHB_train_Case08	0.13	0.46	0.76	0.55	0.65	0.47
CHB_train_Case09	0.03	0.23	0.18	0.18	0.28	0.09
CHB_train_Case10	0.05	0.23	0.38	0.18	0.39	0.43