MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304701090 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0275364

A new buffering theory of social support and psychological stress

2022· article· en· W4304701090 on OpenAlexaff
Stelios Bekiros, Hadi Jahanshahi, Jesús M. Muñoz‐Pacheco

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmplitudePerturbation (astronomy)Statistical physicsChaoticBifurcationEntropy (arrow of time)MathematicsFractional calculusStress (linguistics)Computer sciencePsychologyApplied mathematicsPhysicsNonlinear systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A dynamical model linking stress, social support, and health has been recently proposed and numerically analyzed from a classical point of view of integer-order calculus. Although interesting observations have been obtained in this way, the present work conducts a fractional-order analysis of that model. Under a periodic forcing of an environmental stress variable, the perceived stress has been analyzed through bifurcation diagrams and two well-known metrics of entropy and complexity, such as spectral entropy and C0 complexity. The results obtained by numerical simulations have shown novel insights into how stress evolves with frequency and amplitude of the perturbation, as well as with initial conditions for the system variables. More precisely, it has been observed that stress can alternate between chaos, periodic oscillations, and stable behaviors as the fractional order varies. Moreover, the perturbation frequency has revealed a narrow interval for the chaotic oscillations, while its amplitude may present different values indicating a low sensitivity regarding chaos generation. Also, the perceived stress has been noted to be highly sensitive to initial conditions for the symptoms of stress-related ill-health and for the social support received from family and friends. This work opens new directions of research whereby fractional calculus might offer more insight into psychology, life sciences, mental disorders, and stress-free well-being.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.456
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.035 · 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

Citations45
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207