The Continuum from Temperament to Mental Illness: Dynamical Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temperament in healthy individuals and mental illness have been conjectured to lie along a continuum of neurobehavioral regulation. This continuum is frequently regarded in dimensional terms, with temperament and mental illness lying at opposite poles along various dimensional descriptors. However, temperament and mental illness are quintessentially dynamical phenomena, and as such there is value in examining what insights can be arrived at through the lens of our current understanding of dynamical systems. The formal study of dynamical systems has led to the development of a host of markers which serve to characterize and classify dynamical systems and which could be used to study temperament and mental illness. The most useful markers for temperament and mental illness apply to time series data and include geometrical markers such as (strange) attractors and repellors and analytical markers such as fluctuation spectroscopy, scaling, entropy, recurrence time. Temperament and mental illness, however, possess fundamental characteristics that present considerable challenges for current dynamical systems approaches: transience, contextuality and emergence. This review discusses the need for time series data and the implications of these three characteristics on the formal study of the continuum and presents a dynamical systems model based upon Whitehead's Process Theory and the neurochemical Functional Ensemble of Temperament model. The continuum can be understood as second or higher order dynamical phases in a multiscale landscape of superposed dynamical systems. Markers are sought to distinguish the order parameters associated with these phases and the control parameters which describe transitions among these dynamics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".