Sleep Quality Prediction From Wearable Data Using Deep Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The importance of sleep is paramount to health. Insufficient sleep can reduce physical, emotional, and mental well-being and can lead to a multitude of health complications among people with chronic conditions. Physical activity and sleep are highly interrelated health behaviors. Our physical activity during the day (ie, awake time) influences our quality of sleep, and vice versa. The current popularity of wearables for tracking physical activity and sleep, including actigraphy devices, can foster the development of new advanced data analytics. This can help to develop new electronic health (eHealth) applications and provide more insights into sleep science. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of predicting sleep quality (ie, poor or adequate sleep efficiency) given the physical activity wearable data during awake time. In this study, we focused on predicting good or poor sleep efficiency as an indicator of sleep quality. METHODS: Actigraphy sensors are wearable medical devices used to study sleep and physical activity patterns. The dataset used in our experiments contained the complete actigraphy data from a subset of 92 adolescents over 1 full week. Physical activity data during awake time was used to create predictive models for sleep quality, in particular, poor or good sleep efficiency. The physical activity data from sleep time was used for the evaluation. We compared the predictive performance of traditional logistic regression with more advanced deep learning methods: multilayer perceptron (MLP), convolutional neural network (CNN), simple Elman-type recurrent neural network (RNN), long short-term memory (LSTM-RNN), and a time-batched version of LSTM-RNN (TB-LSTM). RESULTS: Deep learning models were able to predict the quality of sleep (ie, poor or good sleep efficiency) based on wearable data from awake periods. More specifically, the deep learning methods performed better than traditional logistic regression. “CNN had the highest specificity and sensitivity, and an overall area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.9449, which was 46% better as compared with traditional logistic regression (0.6463). CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning methods can predict the quality of sleep based on actigraphy data from awake periods. These predictive models can be an important tool for sleep research and to improve eHealth solutions for sleep.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".