MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025020821 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2014.2375292

Assess Sleep Stage by Modern Signal Processing Techniques

2014· article· en· W2025020821 on OpenAlexaff
Hau‐Tieng Wu, Ronen Talmon, Yu‐Lun Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Science CouncilMarie Curie
KeywordsSIGNAL (programming language)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSleep (system call)Signal processingComputer scienceElectroencephalographySleep StagesSupport vector machineSpeech recognitionPolysomnographyNeurosciencePsychologyDigital signal processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, two modern adaptive signal processing techniques, empirical intrinsic geometry and synchrosqueezing transform, are applied to quantify different dynamical features of the respiratory and electroencephalographic signals. We show that the proposed features are theoretically rigorously supported, as well as capture the sleep information hidden inside the signals. The features are used as input to multiclass support vector machines with the radial basis function to automatically classify sleep stages. The effectiveness of the classification based on the proposed features is shown to be comparable to human expert classification-the proposed classification of awake, REM, N1, N2, and N3 sleeping stages based on the respiratory signal (resp. respiratory and EEG signals) has the overall accuracy 81.7% (resp. 89.3%) in the relatively normal subject group. In addition, by examining the combination of the respiratory signal with the electroencephalographic signal, we conclude that the respiratory signal consists of ample sleep information, which supplements to the information stored in the electroencephalographic signal.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations122
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207