The potential of ensemble-based automated sleep staging on single-channel EEG signal from a wearable device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Machine-learning-based sleep staging models have achieved expert-level performance on standard polysomnographic (PSG) data. However, their application to EEG recorded by wearable devices remains limited by non-conventional referencing montage and the lack of benchmarking against PSG. Here, we tested whether an ensemble of state-of-the-art automatic staging algorithms can reliably classify sleep from a customized configuration of the ZMax headband, adapted to record a single fronto-mastoid EEG channel. A total of 35 nights of simultaneous ZMax and PSG recordings were acquired in a home setting, amounting to 250.02 hours of analysable data from 10 healthy participants. PSG data were scored according to AASM criteria by two independent experts from different sleep centres, with discrepancies resolved to obtain a consensus hypnogram. ZMax signal was processed using four machine-learning algorithms (YASA, U-Sleep, SleepTransformer, DeepResNet), whose predictions were further combined into a final ensemble scoring through soft-voting . The ensemble scoring achieved almost perfect agreement with human consensus staging (night-level mean ± SD; accuracy = 88.83% ± 2.84%, Cohen’s κ = 84.10% ± 4.52%, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient = 84.54% ± 4.23%). It showed excellent predictive accuracy for REM (F1-score = 93.99%), N3 (89.53%), N2 (87.93%), and wakefulness (86.37%), with lower performance for N1 (53.20%). These findings support the deployment of an ensemble scoring approach based on state-of-the-art sleep staging algorithms on ultra-minimal, mastoid-referenced EEG setups. This paradigm opens the way to the integration of data from modern wearable technologies into traditional PSG-based sleep research, overcoming longstanding barriers to ecological and large-scale sleep monitoring.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".