Time Estimation in Chronic Insomnia Sufferers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study is 2-fold: (1) compare the time-estimation performance of chronic insomnia sufferers to that of good sleepers and (2) evaluate the severity of the sleep complaint in order to assess its association with the time-estimation performance. DESIGN: Between subjects design. PARTICIPANTS: The sample included 11 individuals suffering from chronic primary insomnia (7 women and 4 men, mean age = 44.64 years, SD = 12.71) and 11 good sleepers (5 women and 6 men, mean age = 48.00 years, SD = 7.86). INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: All participants completed a time-estimation task, namely a finger-tapping task. The results indicate no significant between-group differences on time-estimation data, as well as no significant relationship between severity of insomnia complaint and estimation of time. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the tendency to misestimate sleep difficulties is not linked to impaired time estimation-specific processes in insomnia sufferers, as measured with the present task.
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) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".