Sleep Apnea Detection Based on Thoracic and Abdominal Movement Signals of Wearable Piezo-Electric Bands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physiologically, the thoracic (THO) and abdominal (ABD) movement signals, captured using wearable piezo-electric bands, provide information about various types of apnea, including central sleep apnea (CSA) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, the use of piezo-electric wearables in detecting sleep apnea events has been seldom explored in the literature. This study explored the possibility of identifying sleep apnea events, including OSA and CSA, by solely analyzing {one or both the THO and ABD signals. An adaptive non-harmonic model was introduced to model the THO and ABD signals, which allows us to design features for sleep apnea events. To confirm the suitability of the extracted features, a support vector machine was applied to classify three categories -- normal and hypopnea, OSA, and CSA. According to a database of} 34 subjects, the overall classification accuracies were on average $75.9\%\pm 11.7\%$ and $73.8\%\pm 4.4\%$, respectively, based on the cross validation. When the features determined from the THO and ABD signals were combined, the overall classification accuracy became $81.8\%\pm 9.4\%$. These features were applied for designing a state machine for online apnea event detection. Two event-by-event accuracy indices, S and I, were proposed for evaluating the performance {of the state machine. For the same database, the} S index was $84.01\%\pm 9.06\%$, and the I index was $77.21\%\pm 19.01\%$. The results indicate the considerable potential of applying the proposed algorithm to clinical examinations for both screening and homecare purposes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".