Stability Analysis of Heartbeat Control Based on

the Zeeman Framework

Mohamed Abdelhady1, Yuriy Kondratenko 2, Wael Abouelwafa 3, Dan Simon1
1
Cleveland State University, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Dept.,Cleveland, OH 44115 USA,
m.abdelelhadi@csuohio.edu, d.j.simon@csuohio.edu
2
Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, Intelligent Information Systems Dept., Mykolaiv, 54003, Ukraine,
yuriy.kondratenko@chmnu.edu.ua
3
Minia University, Biomedical Engineering Department, Egypt,
wael.wafa@mu.edu.eg

Abstract—Nonlinear control stability of a heart beat
tracking system is investigated in this paper based on second-
order original and third-order modified Zeeman’s heartbeat
models. Stability analysis shows that the third-order model is
less sensitive to model parameter variations and thus shows
long range stable performance.
Keywords—ECG; Zeeman; Stability analysis; Heartbeat
I. INTRODUCTION
The most basic identifier of human heart activity is the
electrocardiogram (ECG), which is a recording of body
surface potentials generated by the electrical activity of the
heart. The interpretation of the ECG is an important aspect
of the dignostic evaluation of an patients cardiac status. It
is a periodically fluctuating signal that represents the
electrical potential produced by electrical action in the
heart tissue.The ECG can be estimated by recording the
potential between two cathodes on the surface of the skin at
some predetermined locations. Certain data extracted from
the ECG signal can be utilized to infer cardiovascular
wellbeing in addition to diagnosing potential heart
problems. The information obtained from the ECG is not
only vital for the medical diagnosis, but also provides
important data for researchers to study the mathematical
models of heartbeats.
An ECG waveform consistes of a components that
indicate electrical activity during a heartbeat. These
components are labeled P, Q, R, S, T and U. The P wave
is the first short upward movement of the ECG trace. It
indicates atrial contraction while blood moves into the
ventricles from the atria.
The QRS complex normally starts with a downward
deflection, Q; a larger upwards deflection culminating in a
peak R; and then a downwards S wave. PR interval
indicates the transit time for the electrical signal to travel
from the sinus node to the ventriclesand , The QRS
complex indicates ventricular depolarization and
contraction.and The T wave representing ventricular
repolarization [1-3].
Heartbeat is controlled by the nervous system, and as a
result, the ECG heart rate and its variability measurements
are a quantitative measrments of cardiovascular control [4-
7]. Conventionally, heart rate fluctuation has been assessed
by calculating indices based on statistical operations on RR
intervals (mean and variance). The most widely used time
domain index is the average heart rate, which is easy to
calculate over a given length of time.
The description of an ECG represents the nature of the
heartbeat, which provides the target for a pacemaker
oscillator output. The development of mathematical
heartbeat models of an ECG with appropriate PQRST
peaks, QRS complex, PR and ST segments, PR and QT
intervals and heart rate variation (HRV) [8-12] spectra, has
been, and continues to be, the subject of wide investigations
with varying degrees of success.
II. THE DYNAMICS OF THE ZEEMAN MODEL
A. The Basic Heartbeat Model
Zeeman’s original paper [4] analyzed two types of
excitable biological systems: nerves and the heart. He
modeled electrical nerve stimulation with nonlinear
coupled differential equations[1, 4] based on the van der
Pol linear equation. The original form of the model is
1
𝑥̇1 (𝑡) − (𝑥 3 (𝑡) − 𝑇𝑥1 (𝑡) + 𝑥2 (𝑡))
[ ]=[ 𝜖 1 ], 𝑇 > 0 (1)
𝑥̇ 2 (𝑡) 𝑥 (𝑡) − 𝑥
1 𝑑
where the states 𝑥1 and 𝑥2 represent the length of a muscle
fiber and a state related to electromechanical activity, 𝜖 is
a small positive constant which plays a role in modeling the
eigenvalues of the cardiac system, 𝑥𝑑 indicates muscle
fiber length, , and 𝑇 indicates the tension in the muscle
fiber. This model is based on the pacemaking generated by
the sino-atrial (SA) node, which is the dominant pacemaker
compared with the slower one produced by the atrio-
ventricular (AV) junction. Furthermore, this model does
not take into consideration sympathetic and
parasympathetic modulations [13].
 In [14], Zeeman’s second ordinary differential equation
of the heartbeat model was modified by adding a switch
control variable to model the pacemaker’s mechanism
of contraction-relaxation [15-17]. In 2007, Jafarnia-
Dabanloo et al. [16] first mention third-order model
modified the third-order nonlinear Zeeman model by
adding neural network control parameters that affect the
oscillation frequency is another modeling based on the van
der Pol oscillator. In contrast to the Zeeman models, the
coupled van der Pol oscillator models the AV node, giving
it a more active role in pacemaking [18]. This model points
on the effect of the coupling between the AV node and the
SA pacemakers in ECG dynamics.
B. The Second-Order Nonlinear Heartbeat Model
As Breitenstein pointed out [19], a good mathematical
model that describes the behavior of the heartbeat should
contain three basic features: a stable equilibrium
representing the relaxation state; a careful selection of
equation parameters causing the heart to go into the
contraction state; and then a return to the relaxation state.
The resulting model [4] is represented by Eq. (1).
In order to investigate the Zeeman model and analyze
its stability, we study the dynamic properties of the model,
such as whether an attractor or a limit cycle are present for
given parameter values. And classifcation behavior of
systems when two different phase portraits represent the
same qualitative dynamic behavior.
This paper study the dynamics of the system in Eq. (1)
with different parameter values T, ϵ and xd , which
indicate electrochemical activities with different values of
the muscle fiber tension T, the fast eigenvalue ϵ, and the
muscle fiber length xd in the diastolic phase. MATLAB is
used to provide the phase portraits of this heartbeat system.
A closed trajectory in phase space with the property that at
least one other trajectory spirals into it either as time
approaches infinity or as time approaches negative infinity
is defined as a limit cycle [20]. For T = 1, ϵ = 0.2,
and xd = 0, we have the phase portrait shown in Figure 1.
We notice in Figure 1 that there is a limit cycle inside [-
1,1] and [-1,2], All trajectories that initiate at any point in
the phase portrait point toward the equilibrium point, as
indicated by vector field arrows. The cubic equation
represented by the solid blue line separates the phase
portrait into upper and lower parts. The equilibrium point
of the system is at the origin; this would change if xd ≠ 0.
The cubic curve shown by the blue line is given by x13 −
Tx1 + x2 = 0. All trajectories end up at the limit cycle
around the equilibrium point. as the vector field inside the
limit cycle is directed away from the point points that the
equilibrium point is unstable.
In order to study the stability properties of the Zeeman
model, we need to find a linearization mechanism that
applies to all operating points. For this, controlling
nonlinear systems by a Feedback linearization is a common
approach used . The approach involves transforming the
nonlinear system into an equivalent linear system through
a change of variables and a suitable control input.
Figure 1. heartbeat system Phase portrait for T = 1,
ϵ = 0.2, xd = 0
Let us consider a control-affine single-input single-
output (SISO) nonlinear system [12] described by
ẋ = f(x) + g(x)u f, g: D ⊂ ℝn → ℝn (2)
y = h(x), h: D ⊂ ℝn → ℝn
where x ⊂ ℝn is the state vector, u, y⊂ ℝ are the control
and output signals, respectively; f, g are smooth vector
fields in a domain D, g is invertible, and h is a smooth
function in D, where D is an open set in ℝn . The goal is to
develop a control input of the form
u = a(x) + b(x)v. (3)
where v is a virtual control. An outer-loop control strategy
for the resulting linear control system can then be applied.
Mathematically speaking, our goal is to find a
diffeomorphism or nonlinear transformation that maps the
nonlinear system in the x-coordinates into a linear system
in augmented z-coordinates. Diffeomorphism is an
invertible function that can map a differentiable manifold
to another differentiable manifold so that both functions are
smooth. Once we perform such a transformation, we can
apply linear system theory and its powerful methodologies.
The basic tool for this task is Lie algebra.
The Lie algebra of the diffeomorphism group M
consists of all vector fields on M that possess the Lie
bracket vector field. Somewhat formally, this is expressed
by making a small change to the coordinate x at each point
in space: x μ → x μ + ϵhμ (x).
Using Lie algebra, we can differentiate the measured
output y(t) with respect to time t as
ẏ = Lf h(x) + Lg h(x)u , (4)
 associated with the target output y(t), we can investigate
where Lf h(x) and Lg h(x)u denote the Lie derivatives of important aspects associated with the input-output
h(x) with respect to f(x) and g(x), respectively. If Lg h(x) = feedback linearization. To do so, we set K(t) = 0 in Eq. (12)
0 then ẏ (t) is independent of u(t). Continuing successive ∀ t ≥ 0, which yields
differentiation p times until u(t) appears explicitly, we E = fo (0, E), (14)
obtain
p p−1
which comprises the zero dynamics for Eqs. (2) and (3).
y (p) = Lf h(x) + Lg Lf h(x)u. (5) The notion of zero dynamics plays an important role in
nonlinear systems that is analogous to the role played in a
The relative degree is the smallest integer p for which u(t)
linear system by the zeros of the transfer function. The
appears, and which makes y at least twice differentiable.
stability of the zero dynamics in Eq. (14) is an important
The nonlinear system in equations (2)-(3) is said to have a
issue in designing a controller. The minimum phase system
well-defined relative degree p in a region D0 ⊂ D if
ia a system whose zero dynamics are asymptotically stable
Lg Lkf h(x)=0 ∀k, 0 ≤k < p − 1; and in the domain of interest.
p−1
Lg Lf h(x)u ≠ 0, (6) The study of minimum phase systems is important
because of the direct relation between the asymptotic
for all x ⊂ D0 . Note that p ≤ n . From Eq. (5), define stability of zero dynamics and the local asymptotic stability
of feedback linearized systems. which is described by
v ≜ y (p) = b(x) + D(x) u (7) saying that the local asymptotic stability of the zero
where v(t) is a one-dimensional transformed input created dynamics is the necessary and sufficient condition for the
by the feedback linearization process, b(x) is called the local asymptotic stability of the feedback linearized system
nonlinearity cancellation factor, and D(x) the decoupling in Eqs. (11) - (13).
matrix which is a scalar if the system is SISO. After some If the zero dynamics are unstable in the region of
algebra, Eq. (7) yields the well-known linearizing feedback interest, the system cannot be used for designing a
control law [4] controller because some or all of the states diverge toward
infinity. In this case the system called nonminimum phase.
u = D−1 (x)(−b(x) + v) (8) In the next section, we will state our control objective with
where D(x) is invertible and nonsingular. The general the aid of a mathematical description based on feedback
transformation for a relative degree p < n can be cast linearization.
through the diffeomorphism z = F(x) , which can be C. Objective
expressed as Here we consider output tracking control in which the
Zeeman model output y(t) is forced to track a reference
h(x) trajectory yr (t). Define the output tracking error as
⋮
ρ−1 e ≜ y − yr . (15)
K Lf h(x)
z = F(x) ≜ [—] = — (9) The control objective is to force e(t) → 0 such that
E Φ1 (x) y(t) → yr (t) as t → ∞.
⋮ To accomplish this objective, we can differentiate both
[ Φn−p (x) ] sides of Eq. (17), which yields

where K ⊂ ℝp , E ⊂ ℝn−p , and Φi (x), i= 1,.., n-p, are ė = ẏ − yṙ

chosen such that F(x) is a diffeomorphism on a ⋮ } (16)
(ρ) (ρ)
domain D0 ⊂ D; that is, the Jacobian matrix associated e(ρ) = y (ρ) − yr = v (ρ) − yr
with F(x) is nonsingular, and
where ρ is the number of differentiations. We can choose a
∂∅i suitable tracking control law for the transformed input v(t)
Lg ∅i (x) = g(x) = 0, 1 ≤ i ≤ n − p (10)
∂x
as
for all x ∈ D0 . The diffeomorphism in Eq. (11) leads to (p)
the normal state space linear form which is well-known: v = −Γe + yr (17)
(ρ−1) T
K̇ = AK K + BK v (11) where e = [e ė ë … e ] , and Γ is the feedback gain
Ė = fo (K, E) (12) matrix. Equation (17) is considered the controller equation.
y=h(x) = K1 (13) The feedback gain matrix can be calculated in Hurwitz
form, in which the eigenvalues of (AK − Bk Γ) lie in the
where K is the state in the new coordinate system. These
left-hand side of the complex plane. The closed loop
equations provide a linear representation for the Zeeman
nonlinear system is then given as
model, which is called an input-output feedback
linearization augmented model. With a virtual input v(t) ẋ = f(x) + g(x)D−1 (x)[−b(x) + v] (18)
 III. MODEL STABILITY ANALYSIS −1 T
λ2,3 = (3E 2 – T)| = −2 (27)
ε E=±√T ε
In this section we investigate the stability of both the
2nd and 3rd order models. Stability analysis is provided From (29) we can see that λ1,2 < 0 for all T > 0 and ϵ >
through the zero dynamics of the feedback linearizable 0, and the system is asymptotically stable.
model and it always starts by selecting a convenient output We thus draw an important conclusion: regardless of
that is easy to measure, such as electromechanical the values of the parameters T and ϵ , the system is
quantities. Electromechanical quantities are easy to asymptotically stable around two equilibrium points as long
measure through muscle membranes using electrical as T > 0 and ϵ > 0.
sensors. Much of the material in section is based on [21].
B. Stability analysis for 3nd order system
A. Stability analysis for 2nd order system Consider the 3rd order model described as
In the 2nd order nonlinear heartbeat model described by
Eqs. (2) and (3), we choose the output measurement to be ϵẋ 1 = −(x13 + x1 x2 + x3 ) (28)
y(t) = x2 (t). Differentiating y(t) with respect to t yields ẋ 2 = −2x1 − 2x2
ẋ 3 = −x2 − 1 + u
ẏ = x1 − xd + (xd − xs )u (19)
where x1 (t) represents the length of the muscle fiber, x2 (t)
u appears in the equation which indicates a relative degree represents tension in the muscle fiber, x3 (t) is related to
p = 1. This implies that the system has both internal and electromechanical activity, ϵ is a small positive constant,
external dynamics and its diffeomorphism is given as and u(t) represents the cardiac pacemaker control signal,
h(x) K x2 which puts the heart into the diastolic and systolic states.
z = F(x) = [ − − ] = [—] = [—] (20) This model does not have any significant difference from
∅ (x) x1 the 2nd order model, except that it considers the muscle
E
fiber tension as a state.
The resulting Jacobian matrix has the form In order to study the stability of this model we will start
∂F(x) 0 1 with Lie brackets as illustrated in Eqs. (6)-(9). Also, we
=[ ] (21) select y(t) = x3 (t) which is physically convenient, since
∂x 1 0
x3 (t) represents an electromechanical effect that can easily
The Jacobian is non-singular for all x ∈ ℝ2 and we can be measured. Then we can proceed by differentiating y(t)
consider the diffeomorphism as a global diffeomorphism with respect to time t as follows:
for the 2nd order heart beat model. From Eq. (20) we can
infer that 𝑥1 represents the internal dynamics and x2 ẏ = ẋ 3 = −x2 − 1 + u (29)
represents the external dynamics of the system. The system Since u appears in the above equation, it’s obvious that the
can then be written as relative degree is p = 1. Thus, the heartbeat system has
K̇ = E − (xd − xs )u (22) both external and internal dynamics. The diffeomorphism
−1 is given by
Ė = (E 3 – TE + K) (23)
ε
y=K (24) h(x) K x2
−−− − − − −
Next we analyze the system stability by checking the z = F(x) = [ ]=[ ]= [ x ] (30)
∅1 (x) E1 1
internal dynamics in Eq. (22). The zero dynamics should ∅2 (x) E2 x2
satisfy the condition
The Jacobian matrix of F(x) can be easily found as
−1
Ė = f0 (K, E)|K=0 = (E 3– TE ) (25)
ε
∂F(x) 0 0 1
We can see that there are three equilibrium points {E = 0, = [1 0 0]
∂x
E = √T , E = −√T }. We apply the indirect Lyapunov 0 1 0
stability theorem to analyze the stability at the equilibrium which is nonsingular for all x ∈ ℝ3 . For this reason F(x) is
points. First, at the origin, by considering T > 0 and ϵ > 0, considered a global diffeomorphism. Thus, we can describe
we can show that λ1 > 0 as follows: the system with the diffeomorphism equations as

λ1 =
−1
(3E 2 – T)| =
T
>0 (26) K̇ = −E2 − 1 + u (31)
ε ε 1
E=0
Ė1 = − (E13 + E1 E2 + K ) (32)
ε
Ė2 = − 2 E1 −2 E2 (33)
y=K (34)
From Eq. (26), we see that the system is unstable at the
origin. Second, we consider the other equilibrium points as
follows:
 and the zero dynamics equations follow as Figure 2, the zero dynamics system is stable at the
equilibrium points (0,0) and (1,-1). The equilibrium points
1
Ė1 = − (E13 + E1 E2 ) are illustrated in Figure 2 with two blue square markers. In
ε } (35) Figure 2 we can see that all states with positive K1
Ė2 = − 2 E1 −2 E2 converge to the (0,0) equilibrium point, while all states with
C. Stability Assessment negative K 2 converge to the (1,-1) equilibrium point.
We shall show that the zero dynamics of Eq. (35) has
two equilibrium points, one at the origin and the other at
(1,-1). Stability assessment can be investigated through
Lyapunov indirect stability for each equilibrium point. In
order to do so, we compute the Jacobian for the zero
dynamics system as
−(3E2
1 +E2 ) E1
J=[ − ] (36)
ϵ ϵ
−2 −2
At the first equilibrium point, (0,0), we have
−(3E2
1 +E2 ) E1
− 0 0
J(0,0) = A1 = [ ϵ ϵ ]=[ ] (37)
−2 −2 −2 −2

The eigenvalues of A1 are 0 and -2. Since one of the Figure 2. Phase portrait of the zero dynamics, showing stability at
the (0,0) and (1,-1) equilibrium points
eigenvalues is zero, stability cannot be concluded from
Lyapunov’s indirect theorem. In this case we can resort to E. System sensitivity with respect to changes in ϵ
the reduced system theorem, which leads to conclude that We observe that the value of ϵ in the zero dynamics of
the zero dynamics system is asymptotically stable [19]. (35) has a significant effect. In order to investigate this
At the second equilibrium point, (1,-1), we have effect, we vary ϵ and solve the system of differential
−(3E2
1 +E2 ) E1 2 1 equations (35) with ode45, then illustrate the effect of
− − − changes in ϵ with corresponding phase portraits. We use
J(1,−1) = A2 = [ ϵ ϵ ]=[ ϵ ϵ] (38)
−2 −2 −2 −2 this process to show the system sensitivity to the parameter
We can make a clear conclusion from the eigenvalues of A2 ϵ in range [0.05, 10]. Figure 3 depicts the effect of
that the zero dynamics at (1,-1) is asymptotically stable, changing ϵ within this range. or small ϵ values, we see that
because the real parts of the eigenvalues of A2 are negative, the equilibrium point (0,0) dominates the zero dynamics.
so A2 is Hurwitz. All states converge to the equilibrium point at (0,0).

D. Direct result for stability analysis of the 3rd order
system
In order to study system stability, the zero dynamics of
the differential equations of Eq. (35) is investigated using
the phase portraits around the equilibrium points
(MATLAB is used to plot the figures). As we can see from
However, when increasing ϵ to values between 0.5 and
1, we observe two vortexes corresponding to the two
equilibrium points, with equal influence effect over
theentire state space, with approximately equal numbers

𝜖 = 0.05 𝜖 = 0.1 𝜖 = 0.5

𝜖=1 𝜖=5 𝜖 = 100

Figure 3. Phase portraits for zero dynamics with parameter value changes
 of states driven to the each equilibrium point. But by
continuing to increase ϵ, we see that the equilibrium points
start to deviate from their original positions.
For example, when ϵ = 5 the equilibrium points are at
about (0.5, -0.5) and (1.2 -1.2). It is clear that increasing ϵ
shifts the equilibrium points diagonally. Also, it is observed
that theequilibrium points start to merge into a single
equilibrium point at (0,0) at largervalues of ϵ, as depicted
in the lower plot of Figure 3.
CONCLUSION AND REMARKS
Two of Zeeman’s heartbeat models are investigated:
the original Zeeman model, which is represented by a
second-order nonlinear differential equation, and an
augmented third-order nonlinear differential equation.
modified Zeeman model, which is based on. Since the
qualitative features of the excitation potential of the heart
are very close to the dynamic behavior of the classic van
der Pol oscillator, Zeeman introduced a nonlinear coupled
set of differential equations, which is still the cornerstone
for modern pacemaker systems.
However, investigation of the Zeeman model, which is
composed of a nonlinear coupled set of differential
equations, shows that the model parameters have a strong
influence on its performance. The model parameters
include length of muscle fiber and tension of muscle fiber.
After investigating the equilibria of this model, we varied
the model parameter and studied the effect on the equilibria.
We conclude that the main drawback of the original
Zeeman model is itssensitivity to its parameters, which
results in a small stability region even if the mathematical
model is a simple 2nd-order system.
On the other hand, we also analyzed the modified
Zeeman model, which implicitly is based on a 3rd-order
nonlinear differential equation. Our stability investigation
shows that the 3rd-order model, after feedback
linearization, is more stable than the 2nd-order model.
Linearization results in two zero-dynamics equilibrium
points. Initially, the equilibrium points are not sensitive to
the model parameter 𝜖 .
However, increasing this parameter value leads to a
merger of the two equilibria into a single equilibrium point
at the origin. We conclude that the 3rd-order model is less
sensitive to model parameter variation, which leads to long-
range stable performance.
REFERENCES
1. R. Suckley and V. N. Biktashev, "Comparison of asymptotics of
heart and nerve excitability", in Physical Review E, 68(1), 2003, p.
011902.
2. A. Burguera, "Fast QRS detection and ECG compression based on
signal structural analysis", in IEEE Journal of Biomedical and
Health Informatics, 23(1), 2019, pp. 123-131.
3. T. T. Habte, H. Saleh, B. Mohammad, and M. Ismail, "Background
on ECG Processing", in Ultra Low Power ECG Processing System
for IoT Devices, T.T. Habte, H. Saleh, B. Mohammad, and M. Ismail,
Eds. New York: Springer, 2019, pp. 13-26.
4. E. C. Zeeman, "Differential equations for the heartbeat and nerve
impulse", in Dynamical Systems, Elsevier, 1973, pp. 683-741.
5. I. Atamanyuk and Y. Kondratenko, "Calculation Method for a
Computer's Diagnostics of Cardiovascular Diseases Based on
Canonical Decompositions of Random Sequences", in ICT in
Education, Research and Industrial Applications: Integration,
Harmonization and Knowledge Transfer. Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference ICTERI-2015, S.Batsakis, et al. (Eds.),
CEUR-WS, Vol. 1356, Lviv, Ukraine, May 14-16, 2015, pp. 108-
120.
6. V. Shebanin, I. Atamanyuk, Y. Kondratenko, and Y. Volosyuk,
"Canonical mathematical model and information technology for
cardio-vascular diseases diagnostics", 2017 14th International
Conference: The Experience of Designing and Application of CAD
Systems in Microelectronics, CADSM 2017 - Proceedings Open
Access, 2017, pp. 438-440, DOI: 10.1109/CADSM.2017.7916170
7. J.-H. Lee, "Bio Implant ECG Sensor with Continuous Arrhythmia
Monitoring and Auto Diagnosis", in Sensors, Transducers, Signal
Conditioning and Wireless Sensors Networks, Book Series:
Advances in Sensors: Reviews, Vol. 3, S.Y. Yurish (Ed.), Chapter 8,
IFSA Publishing, S. L., Barcelona, Spain, 2016, pp. 159-168.
8. K. M. Godfrey, A. Juarascio, S. Manasse, A. Minassian, V.
Risbrough, and N. Afari, "Heart rate variability and emotion
regulation among individuals with obesity and loss of control
eating", in Physiology & Behavior, vol. 199, 2019, pp. 73-78.
9. S. Massaro and L. Pecchia, "Heart rate variability (HRV) analysis: A
methodology for organizational neuroscience", in Organizational
Research Methods, vol. 22(1), 2019, pp. 354-393.
10. A. M. Stanton, R. L. Boyd, J. J. Fogarty, and C.M. Meston, "Heart
rate variability biofeedback increases sexual arousal among women
with female sexual arousal disorder: Results from a randomized-
controlled trial", in Behaviour Research and Therapy, vol. 115, 2019,
pp. 90-102.
11. D. P. Williams, J. Koenig, L. Carnevali, A. Sgoifo, M. N. Jarczok, E.
M. Sternberg, and J. F. Thayer, "Heart rate variability and
inflammation: a meta-analysis of human studies", in Brain,
Behavior, and Immunity, 2019. Available online 11 March 2019, in
press. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2019.03.009
12. G. V. Gerardo, D. P. Williams, P. Bjalkebring, E. Petters, and J. F.
Thayer, "A Preliminary Understanding of the Association
Between Heart Rate Variability and Numeracy", in Psychosomatic
Medicine, vol. 81, Iss. 4, 2019, pp. A48-A48.
13. P. N. Tu, Dynamical systems: an introduction with applications in
economics and biology, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
14. D.S.Jones, B.D. Sleeman, Differential equations and mathematical
biology, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2004.
15. L.B.Armenio, E. Terzi, M. Farina, and R. Scattolini, Echo State
Networks: Analysis, Training and Predictive Control. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1902.01618, 2019.
16. N. Jafarnia-Dabanloo, D.C. McLernon, H. Zhang, A. Ayatollahi, and
V. Johari-Majd, "A modified Zeeman model for producing HRV
signals and its application to ECG signal generation", in Journal of
Theoretical Biology, vol. 244(2), 2007, pp. 180-189.
17. A. Ayatollahi, N. Jafarnia Dabanloo, D.C. McLernon, V. Johari
Majd, and H. Zhang, "A comprehensive model using modified
Zeeman model for generating ECG signals", in Iranian Journal of
Electrical and Electronic Engineering, vol. 1(2), 2005, pp. 88-93.
18. B. Van Der Pol and J. Van Der Mark, "LXXII. The heartbeat
considered as a relaxation oscillation, and an electrical model of the
heart," in The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical
Magazine and Journal of Science, vol. 6(38), 1928, pp. 763-775.
19. D. S. Breitenstein, Cardiovascular modeling: The mathematical
expression of blood circulation, Master's thesis, University of
Pittsburgh, PA, 1993.
20. H. K. Khalil and L. Praly, "High‐gain observers in nonlinear
feedback control", in International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear
Control, vol. 24(6), 2014, pp. 993-1015.
21. W. Thanom, R.N. Loh, "Nonlinear control of heartbeat models", in
Journal on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, vol. 9(1), 2011,
pp. 21-27.