Papers › Do Not Sleep on Traditional Machine Learning: Simple and Interpretable Techniques Are...

Do Not Sleep on Traditional Machine Learning: Simple and Interpretable Techniques Are Competitive to Deep Learning for Sleep Scoring

15 Jul 2022arXiv:2207.07753archive 2025-07-28

Jeroen Van Der Donckt, Jonas Van Der Donckt, Emiel Deprost, Nicolas Vandenbussche, Michael Rademaker, Gilles Vandewiele, Sofie Van Hoecke

Over the last few years, research in automatic sleep scoring has mainly focused on developing increasingly complex deep learning architectures. However, recently these approaches achieved only marginal improvements, often at the expense of requiring more data and more expensive training procedures. Despite all these efforts and their satisfactory performance, automatic sleep staging solutions are not widely adopted in a clinical context yet. We argue that most deep learning solutions for sleep scoring are limited in their real-world applicability as they are hard to train, deploy, and reproduce. Moreover, these solutions lack interpretability and transparency, which are often key to increase adoption rates. In this work, we revisit the problem of sleep stage classification using classical machine learning. Results show that competitive performance can be achieved with a conventional machine learning pipeline consisting of preprocessing, feature extraction, and a simple machine learning model. In particular, we analyze the performance of a linear model and a non-linear (gradient boosting) model. Our approach surpasses state-of-the-art (that uses the same data) on two public datasets: Sleep-EDF SC-20 (MF1 0.810) and Sleep-EDF ST (MF1 0.795), while achieving competitive results on Sleep-EDF SC-78 (MF1 0.775) and MASS SS3 (MF1 0.817). We show that, for the sleep stage scoring task, the expressiveness of an engineered feature vector is on par with the internally learned representations of deep learning models. This observation opens the door to clinical adoption, as a representative feature vector allows to leverage both the interpretability and successful track record of traditional machine learning models.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections