MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S4Sleep: Elucidating the design space of deep-learning-based sleep stage classification models

2025· article· en· W4407085131 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tiezhi Wang, Nils Strodthoff

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers in Biology and Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSleep (system call)Stage (stratigraphy)Space (punctuation)Machine learningDeep learningBiologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine-learning-based automatic sleep stage scoring is a promising approach to enhance the time-consuming manual annotation process of polysomnography recordings. Although numerous algorithms have been proposed for this purpose, systematic exploration of architectural design decisions remains limited. This study conducts a comprehensive investigation into these design choices within the broad category of encoder–predictor architectures. The methodology identifies robust architectures applicable to both time series and spectrogram input representations, both of which leverage structured state space models as integral components. Without further hyperparameter adjustments, the proposed models S4Sleep(spec) and S4Sleep(ts) consistently surpass all existing approaches on the most commonly used benchmark datasets: Sleep EDF, the Montreal Archive of Sleep Studies, and, most notably, the extensive Sleep Heart Health Study dataset. The architectural insights derived from this research, along with the refined methodology for architecture search demonstrated herein, are expected to not only advance future research in sleep staging but also be beneficial for other time series annotation tasks. • Developed systematic method for finding optimal time series annotation architectures. • Identified encoder–predictor models with S4 as best performing architecture. • Demonstrated strong performance using both raw time series and spectrogram inputs. • Validated S4’s effectiveness as signal encoder for both input representations. • Surpassed benchmarks on three major sleep datasets (Sleep EDF, MASS, SHHS).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers in Biology and MedicineSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207