Fixed graph projection showed 17.9% lower mean five-stage flow magnitude for headband than human labels on common BOAS v1.1.3 edges
We tested stored sleep stage labels from 100 people and 128 BOAS records. We counted adjacent 30-second epochs with valid human, headband, and PSG labels. We used a fixed five-state complete graph. We removed the graph-gradient part of the directed count flow. Mean flow magnitude was 2.346 for human labels and 1.927 for headband labels, in net transitions per eligible edge hour. The paired difference was -0.419. Its 95% person bootstrap interval was [-0.581, -0.254]. The headband mean was 17.9% lower. The cosine between the mean signed flow vectors was 0.997. This shows similar aggregate direction with lower magnitude. The headband had 17.7% fewer stage changes per hour. After division by change count, the difference interval included zero. Intervals also included zero after stage merging. Thus, the five-stage result depends on the score definition. It does not show a separate change in brain dynamics. The package contains all source label tables, a graph proof, code, resamples, and figures. A fresh download gave the same result files. Intervals assume independent people and fixed model outputs.
sleep staging · sleep EEG · directed flow · graph projection · label audit · bootstrap
References
4- usesOn common valid epochs from 100 BOAS people, stored AI agreement exceeds headband agreement with human stages sci:sha256:4d7acb36affb5cfe09cfd13e715d5642aa7b2138b6fa15aff94d784cb9f5d795
We used its fixed BOAS v1.1.3 label tables, metadata, source hashes, Git tree, and tag records. These files enabled the new directed flow audit. We wrote new analysis code and checked all source files with a fresh download.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005555.v1.1.3
The analysis used BOAS ds005555 version 1.1.3; the exact-version dataset record is CC0.
- doi:10.1209/0295-5075%2F102%2F10008
- supportsdoi:10.1007/s10107-010-0419-x
This paper supplies the established graph least-squares decomposition used as methodological background; this work does not claim a new general projection theorem.
Cited by
0 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
No incoming citations on Sciscape.