Reliability of the Circadian Rhythm of Water and Macronutrient-Rich Diets Intake in Dietary Choice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rats with ad libitum water and the ability to self-select among three macronutrient-rich diets--carbohydrate (CHO), protein (PRO), and lipid (LIP)--show a circadian rhythmicity in their ingestion. The aim of the present study was to determine whether this circadian rhythmicity is reliable from day to day. Eight rats were offered ad libitum water and a choice of three isoenergetic diet rations providing carbohydrate, protein, and lipid. Water and food intake was recorded every 3 h for 7 days. The reliability of the circadian rhythm of water and food intake was assessed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and the test-retest reliability using the Pearson's Correlation Coefficient (r). The results showed that the circadian rhythm of water, CHO, and PRO intake are strongly reliable. However, the circadian rhythm of LIP intake is less reproducible. Among the three reliable parameters-water, CHO, and PRO, the circadian rhythm of water intake was the most reproducible over 7 days. This suggests that water intake may be used as a marker of circadian rhythmicity in ingestive behavior.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".