Bayesian modeling of heartbeat evoked potentials (HEP) and heart rate variability (HRV) as biomarkers of spiritual and mental wellbeing; an exploratory study
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
Spiritual and mental wellbeing are vital to health. Identification of their psychophysiological correlates enables their evidence-based integration into clinical therapeutics. We applied Bayesian modeling to assess HEPs and HRV as potential biomarkers of spiritual and mental wellbeing as it provides a flexible probabilistic approach. In this cross-sectional study, n = 30 adults completed spiritual (SIWB) and mental (WEMWBS) wellbeing questionnaires, then underwent electrophysiological recordings (EO, EC) with HRV and power spectral density analysis. Influence of difference of HEP and HRV on spiritual and mental wellbeing was analyzed. Bayesian regression identified the combined ΔHEP1 + ΔHEP3 model as the best predictor of spiritual well-being (BF10 = 8.75; R2 = 0.36), where strongest inclusion probability was observed for ΔHEP at Fz (Pincl =0.723), followed by ΔHEP at F7 (Pincl =0.617), with uncertain CrIs (95% CrI [−2.01, 0.05] and CrI [−0.62, 0.01] respectively) providing moderate-to-strong evidence for their inclusion. ΔHEP at F8 showed the strongest inclusion probability (P(incl|data) = 0.64; BF(inclusion) = 1.80), with posterior mean of 0.52 and a 95% CrI spanning [0.00, 1.61]. Demographic factors did not influence SIWB or WEMWBS scores. Bayesian model indicates that HEP can serve as a valuable tool to study psychophysiological modulation in spiritual and psychological interventions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it