MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1853297791 · doi:10.4236/ojd.2015.44005

Connection between the Linoleic Acid and Psychopathology: A Symmetry-Breaking Phenomenon in the Brain?

2015· article· en· W1853297791 on OpenAlexaff
Massimo Cocchi, Chiara Minuto, Lucio Tonello, Jack A. Tuszyński

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Depression · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEicosanoids and Hypertension Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonConnection (principal bundle)PsychopathologySymmetry breakingPsychologyLinoleic acidSymmetry (geometry)NeuroscienceCognitive scienceCommunicationPhysicsBiologyMathematicsPsychiatryBiochemistryParticle physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we discuss the role of the fatty acid composition of brain cells and in platelets in the emergence of psychiatric disorders such as major depression and the bipolar disorder. We argue that the linoleic acid concentration plays the role of a control parameter and there is a critical value of the linoleic acid concentration that determines a transition from healthy mental state to a pathological state. We draw an analogy with symmetry breaking in physical systems where at a bifurcation point on the phase diagram, infinitesimal perturbations to the state of the system result in a transition to a new global attractor state. This is in contrast to the situation away from the critical point where cause and effect are usually found in a linear or almost linear relationship. This observation may have major implications for both diagnostics and therapeutics of mental disorders when viewed as triggered by molecular causes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of DepressionSame topicEicosanoids and Hypertension PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207