Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Neural Eng. 2019 Feb 21;16(3):036004. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/ab0933

Figure 6. Performance comparison between SpindleNet and two other spindle detection algorithms (McSIeep and Spindler).

Figure 6.

a, Examples of sleep spindle detection where the McSIeep algorithm detected a false event in the MASS dataset, whereas the softmax probability output (blue trace) from SpindleNet was below the detection threshold. b,c, Summarized comparative performance on the reduced MASS dataset (n=15 subjects, with annotations from two experts). *, p<0.05; **, p<0.01, unpaired t-test. d, Comparison of the kappa statistic between SpindleNet and McSleep, as well as between them and ground truth (GT). e-g, Similar to panels b-d, except for the reduced DREAMS dataset (n=6 subjects, with annotations from two experts).