Fully automated waist-worn accelerometer algorithm for detecting children’s sleep-period time separate from 24-h physical activity or sedentary behaviors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of 24-h waist-worn accelerometer data for physical activity and sedentary behavior requires that sleep-period time (from sleep onset to the end of sleep, including all sleep epochs and wakefulness after onset) is first identified. To identify sleep-period time in children in this study, we evaluated the validity of a published automated algorithm that requires nonaccelerometer bed- and wake-time inputs, relative to a criterion expert visual analysis of minute-by-minute waist-worn accelerometer data, and validated a refined fully automated algorithm. Thirty grade 4 schoolchildren (50% girls) provided 24-h waist-worn accelerometry data. Expert visual inspection (criterion), a published algorithm (Algorithm 1), and 2 additional automated refinements (Algorithm 2, which draws on the instrument's inclinometer function, and Algorithm 3, which focuses on bedtime and wake time points) were applied to a standardized 24-h time block. Paired t tests were used to evaluate differences in mean sleep time (expert criterion minus algorithm estimate). Compared with the criterion, Algorithm 1 and Algorithm 2 significantly overestimated sleep time by 43 min and 90 min, respectively. Algorithm 3 produced the smallest mean difference (2 min), and was not significantly different from the criterion. Relative to expert visual inspection, our automated Algorithm 3 produced an estimate that was precise and within expected values for similarly aged children. This fully automated algorithm for 24-h waist-worn accelerometer data will facilitate the separation of sleep time from sedentary behavior and physical activity of all intensities during the remainder of the day.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it