Intrinsic timescales and predictive allostatic interoception in brain health and disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cognitive neuroscience of brain diseases faces challenges in understanding the complex relationship between brain structure and function, the heterogeneity of brain phenotypes, and the lack of dimensional and transnosological explanations. This perspective offers a framework combining the predictive coding theory of allostatic interoceptive overload (PAIO) and the intrinsic neural timescales (INT) theory to provide a more dynamic understanding of brain health in psychiatry and neurology. PAIO integrates allostasis and interoception to assess the interaction between internal patterns and environmental stressors, while INT shows that different brain regions operate on different intrinsic timescales. The allostatic overload can be understood as a failure of INT, which involves a breakdown of proper temporal integration and segregation. This can lead to dimensional disbalances between exteroceptive/interoceptive inputs across brain and whole-body levels (cardiometabolic, cardiovascular, inflammatory, immune). This approach offers new insights, presenting novel perspectives on brain spatiotemporal hierarchies and interactions. By integrating these theories, the paper opens innovative paths for studying brain health dynamics, which can inform future research in brain health and disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".