Back

A self-similar helix as a metaphor for continuous time with nested periodicity

Bischof, R.

2025-03-11 bioinformatics
10.1101/2025.03.06.640619 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Humans perceive time as both linear and circular, which is reflected in the dichotomous way we typically organize and visualize temporal information in science: as either time series or periodic plots. These seemingly incompatible perspectives can be reconciled with a helical representation of time. Helices have been underused as a visualization of temporal information, in part because two-dimensional visualization of three-dimensional structures leaves portions of the data hidden and in part due to inherent disadvantages of radial visualizations over linear ones. Nonetheless, the helical metaphor of time brings along an important advantage - it offers an intuitive way to depict continuous time with periodicity at multiple scales. Here, I introduce a representation of time via a model of self-similar, or hierarchical, helices. This model can serve as a cognitive map or mental image of time, as well as an immersive data visualization approach for exploring patterns in timed data with nested periodicity. I demonstrate the model with a few examples (astronomical light phases, air temperature profiles, and wildlife activity patterns) and provide R functions to generate interactive displays of temporal data projected onto hierarchical helix structures.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 1%
16.3%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 20%
8.9%
Similar papers in this journal
3
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Nature Methods
○ 385 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.8%
Similar papers in this journal
5
iMeta
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
7
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.2%
8
Patterns
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
9
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.2%
10
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.8%
11
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.6%
12
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
13
Protein Science
○ 246 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
14
Nature Biotechnology
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
15
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
17
Nature Computational Science
○ 55 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
18
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
19
Cell Reports Methods
○ 165 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
20
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
21
Scientific Data
○ 209 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
22
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.3%
23
Nature Protocols
○ 33 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
24
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.1%
25
Advanced Science
○ 286 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.9%
26
Advanced Intelligent Systems
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
27
PNAS Nexus
◐ 159 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.