MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163035523 · doi:10.3390/s21103316

A Deep Learning Strategy for Automatic Sleep Staging Based on Two-Channel EEG Headband Data

2021· article· en· W3163035523 on OpenAlexaff
Amelia A. Casciola, Sebastiano K. Carlucci, Brianne A. Kent, Amanda M. Punch, Michael A. Muszynski, Daniel J. Zhou, Alireza Kazemi, Maryam S. Mirian, Jason Valerio, Martin J. McKeown, Haakon B. Nygaard

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyPolysomnographySleep (system call)DementiaSleep StagesComputer scienceDeep learningSlow-wave sleepArtificial intelligenceMedicineDiseaseInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep disturbances are common in Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative disorders, and together represent a potential therapeutic target for disease modification. A major barrier for studying sleep in patients with dementia is the requirement for overnight polysomnography (PSG) to achieve formal sleep staging. This is not only costly, but also spending a night in a hospital setting is not always advisable in this patient group. As an alternative to PSG, portable electroencephalography (EEG) headbands (HB) have been developed, which reduce cost, increase patient comfort, and allow sleep recordings in a person's home environment. However, naïve applications of current automated sleep staging systems tend to perform inadequately with HB data, due to their relatively lower quality. Here we present a deep learning (DL) model for automated sleep staging of HB EEG data to overcome these critical limitations. The solution includes a simple band-pass filtering, a data augmentation step, and a model using convolutional (CNN) and long short-term memory (LSTM) layers. With this model, we have achieved 74% (±10%) validation accuracy on low-quality two-channel EEG headband data and 77% (±10%) on gold-standard PSG. Our results suggest that DL approaches achieve robust sleep staging of both portable and in-hospital EEG recordings, and may allow for more widespread use of ambulatory sleep assessments across clinical conditions, including neurodegenerative disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207