Beyond K-complex binary scoring during sleep: probabilistic classification using deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: K-complexes (KCs) are a recognized electroencephalography marker of sensory processing and a defining feature of sleep stage 2. KC frequency and morphology may also be reflective of sleep quality, aging, and a range of sleep and sensory processing deficits. However, manual scoring of K-complexes is impractical, time-consuming, and thus costly and currently not well-standardized. Although automated KC detection methods have been developed, performance and uptake remain limited. METHODS: The proposed algorithm is based on a deep neural network and Gaussian process, which gives the input waveform a probability of being a KC ranging from 0% to 100%. The algorithm was trained on half a million synthetic KCs derived from manually scored sleep stage 2 KCs from the Montreal Archive of Sleep Study containing 19 healthy young participants. Algorithm performance was subsequently assessed on 700 independent recordings from the Cleveland Family Study using sleep stages 2 and 3 data. RESULTS: The developed algorithm showed an F1 score (a measure of binary classification accuracy) of 0.78 and thus outperforms currently available KC scoring algorithms with F1 = 0.2-0.6. The probabilistic approach also captured expected variability in KC shape and amplitude within individuals and across age groups. CONCLUSIONS: An automated probabilistic KC classification is well suited and effective for systematic KC detection for a more in-depth exploration of potential relationships between KCs during sleep and clinical outcomes such as health impacts and daytime symptomatology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".