A Unified Benchmarking Framework for Classical Machine Learning Based Heart Rate Estimation from RGB and NIR rPPG
This work presents a unified benchmarking framework for evaluating classical machine-learning–based heart-rate estimation from remote photoplethysmography (rPPG) across both RGB and near-infrared (NIR) modalities. Despite extensive research on algorithmic rPPG methods, their relative robustness across datasets, illumination conditions, and sensor types remains inconsistently reported. To address this gap, we standardize ROI extraction, signal preprocessing, rPPG computation, handcrafted feature generation, and label formation across four publicly available datasets: UBFC-rPPG Part 1, UBFC-rPPG Part 2, VicarPPG-2, and IMVIA-NIR. We benchmark five rPPG extraction methods (Green, POS, CHROM, PBV, PCA/ICA) combined with four classical regressors using MAE, RMSE, and R2, complemented by permutation feature importance for interpretability. Results show that CHROM is consistently the most reliable algorithm across all RGB datasets, providing the lowest error and highest stability, particularly when paired with tree-based models. For NIR recordings, PCA with spatial patch decomposition substantially outperforms ICA, highlighting the importance of spatial redundancy when color cues are absent. While handcrafted features and classical regressors offer interpretable baselines, their generalization is limited by small-sample datasets and the absence of temporal modeling. The proposed pipeline establishes robust cross-dataset baselines and offers a standardized foundation for future deep-learning architectures, hybrid algorithmic–learned models, and multimodal sensor-fusion approaches in remote physiological monitoring.
Authors
- Adam Alkhalaileh
- Ghassan Al Al Jayyousi
- Sahar Qaadan
Institutions
- German Jordanian University (JO)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Electronics
- Published
- 2026-01-02
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics15010218
- Primary Topic
- Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00