Circadian and homeostatic sleep regulation in morningness–eveningness
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morningness-eveningness has been associated with the entrained circadian phase. However, we recently identified morning and evening types having similar circadian phases. In this paper, we compared parameters of slow-wave activity (SWA) decay in non-rapid-eye-movement (NREM) sleep between these two subgroups to test the hypothesis that differences in the dynamics of nocturnal homeostatic sleep pressure could explain differences in sleep timing preference. Twelve morning-type subjects and 12 evening-type subjects with evening types (aged 19-34 years) selected using the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire were further classified according to the phase of their dim light melatonin onset (DLMO). The six morning types with the earliest DLMO were compared to the six evening types with the latest DLMO ('extreme' phases), and the six morning types with the latest DLMO were compared to the six evening types with the earliest DLMO ('intermediate' phases). Subjects slept according to their preferred sleep schedule. Spectral activity in four midline derivations (Fz, Cz, Pz, Oz) was calculated in NREM sleep and an exponential decay function was applied on SWA data averaged per sleep cycle. In the subjects with intermediate circadian phases, both initial level and decay rate of SWA in Fz were significantly higher in morning than in evening types. No difference appeared between chronotypes of extreme circadian phases. There was no correlation between individual estimates of SWA decay and DLMO. These results support the hypothesis that chronotype can originate from differences in the dissipation of sleep pressure and that homeostatic and circadian processes influence the sleep schedule preference independently.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it