Exponential state transition dynamics in the rest–activity architecture of patients with bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to model the temporal dynamics of sleep-wake transitions, represented by transitions between rest and activity obtained from actigraphic data, in patients with bipolar disorder using a probabilistic state transition approach. METHODS: We collected actigraphic data for 14 days from 20 euthymic patients with bipolar disorder, who had been characterized clinically, demographically, and with respect to their circadian preferences (chronotype). We processed each activity record to generate a series of transitions in both directions between the states of rest (R) and activity (A) and plotted the estimated transition probabilities (pRA and pAR). Each 24-hour period was also divided into a rest phase consisting of the eight consecutive least active hours in each day and an active phase consisting of the 16 consecutive most active hours in each day. We then calculated separate transition probabilities for each of these phases for each participant. We subsequently modeled the rest phase data to find the best fit for rest-activity transitions using maximum likelihood estimation. We also examined the association of transition probabilities with clinical and demographic variables. RESULTS: The best-fit model for rest-activity transitions during the rest phase was a mixture (bimodal) of exponential functions. Of those patients with rapid cycling, 75% had an evening-type chronotype. Patients with bipolar II disorder taking antidepressants had a lower probability of transitioning back to rest than those not on antidepressants [mean ± SD = 0.050 ± 0.006 versus 0.141 ± 0.058, F(1,15) = 3.40, p < 0.05]. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamics of transitions between rest and activity in bipolar disorder can be accounted for by a mixture (bimodal) of exponential functions. Patients taking antidepressants had a reduced probability of sustaining and returning to sleep.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".