MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606389712 · doi:10.1109/bhi.2017.7897306

Multimodal ambulatory sleep detection

2017· article· en· W2606389712 on OpenAlexaff
Weixuan Chen, Akane Sano, Daniel Martínez, Sara Taylor, Andrew W. McHill, Andrew J. K. Phillips, Laura K. Barger, Elizabeth B. Klerman, Rosalind W. Picard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsCanadian Sleep & Circadian Network
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsActigraphySleep (system call)Offset (computer science)Wearable computerComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAmbulatorySpeech recognitionCircadian rhythmMedicineEmbedded systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inadequate sleep affects health in multiple ways. Unobtrusive ambulatory methods to monitor long-term sleep patterns in large populations could be useful for health and policy decisions. This paper presents an algorithm that uses multimodal data from smartphones and wearable technologies to detect sleep/wake state and sleep episode on/offset. We collected 5580 days of multimodal data and applied recurrent neural networks for sleep/wake classification, followed by cross-correlation-based template matching for sleep episode on/offset detection. The method achieved a sleep/wake classification accuracy of 96.5%, and sleep episode on/offset detection F1 scores of 0.85 and 0.82, respectively, with mean errors of 5.3 and 5.5 min, respectively, when compared with sleep/wake state and sleep episode on/offset assessed using actigraphy and sleep diaries.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207