MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2905479315 · doi:10.1109/smartworld.2018.00145

What Wrist Temperature Tells Us When We Sleep Late: A New Perspective of Sleep Health

2018· article· en· W2905479315 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Wei, Zhang Jin, Jennifer Boger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCircadian rhythmSleep (system call)WristFree-running sleepPerspective (graphical)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyShift workSleep inertiaRhythmComputer scienceMedicineAudiologyNeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceSleep debtSleep deprivationCircadian clockLight effects on circadian rhythmInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research has shown that sleep is tied to our internal circadian rhythms and a long-term of misalignment between sleep and circadian rhythms can have harmful effects. Being able to detect circadian patterns is a key component to understanding and supporting a person's sleep. Wrist temperature has been shown to be correlated to circadian rhythm as well as sleep/wake status. In this paper, we explore the use of wrist temperature to evaluate sleep health of 14 participants over 111 days. Our results demonstrate that our sleep detection algorithm based on wrist temperature can be used to reliably estimate individual's daily sleep parameters and can be used to support sleep-based phase assessments. A wrist temperature trend-based assessment is also presented to identify when sleep time is misaligned with circadian rythm. This work provides the first steps in future sleep systems that take into account our internal bio-rhythms.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→