# Recognition of Blinks Activity Patterns during Stress Conditions Using CNN and Markovian Analysis
## 4 Results
### Markovian Analysis
In order to investigate furthermore the indications about the existence of auto-attractor states, looking at differences within matrix \(P\), it was observed that \(P_{11}\) was significantly higher than \(P_{12}\)  for all experiments, phases and tasks. On the other hand, \(P_{22}\) was significantly higher than \(P_{21}\)  for both tasks of the stressful video phase of experiments 2 and 3, for both tasks of the mental tasks phase of experiment 3, while for experiment 1 \(P_{22}\) was significantly higher than \(P_{21}\) for the neutral tasks of the emotional recall and stressful video phases. Thus, the evidence that state 1 is an auto-attractor in all experiments, phases and tasks (keeping in mind the exception for one task, stated above) is strengthened. On the other hand, the nature of state 2 as an auto-attractor seems to hold mainly for the stressful video phase (for both tasks) for experiments 2 and 3. In conclusion, the generation of blinks seems not to be a purely random process. Instead, it appears to possess \"memory\", in the sense that the previous state of the system (i.e., whether a short or long IBI preceded the current IBI) influences which will be the current state. Furthermore, there are strong indications that the short IBI state (state 1) can be characterized as an auto-attractor, across experiments, phases and tasks. Indications on whether the long IBI state (state 2) can be characterized as an auto-attractor across \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**3 rd Experiment** & **Social Exposure** & & & **433.35** \\ \hline  & **Neutral** & & & **433.35** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 2982 & 0.76 [0.7487–0.7635] & 0.67 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 962 & 0.24 [0.2365–0.2513] & 0.33 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 940 & 0.49 [0.4738–0.4993] & 0.67 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 983 & 0.51 [0.5007–0.5217] & 0.33 \\  & **Streed** & & & **63.22** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 3129 & 0.86 [0.8488–0.8610] & 0.83 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 531 & 0.15 [0.1390–0.1512] & 0.17 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 538 & 0.73 [0.7113–0.7388] & 0.83 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 204 & 0.28 [0.2612–0.2887] & 0.17 \\  & **Emotional recall** & & & **237.38** \\  & **Neutral** & & & **238.21** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 1111 & 0.72 [0.7074–0.7388] & 0.59 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 392 & 0.28 [0.2662–0.2962] & 0.41 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 375 & 0.39 [0.3750–0.4079] & 0.59 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 583 & 0.61 [0.5921–0.6250] & 0.41 \\  & **Streed** & & & **238.21** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 2129 & 0.82 [0.8158–0.8326] & 0.76 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 454 & 0.18 [0.1674–0.1862] & 0.24 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 447 & 0.56 [0.5541–0.5752] & 0.76 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 351 & 0.44 [0.4248–0.4549] & 0.24 \\  & **Mental tasks** & & & **228.55** \\  & **Neutral** & & & **228.55** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 1252 & 0.76 [0.7520–0.7757] & 0.64 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 387 & 0.24 [0.2243–0.2480] & 0.36 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 389 & 0.42 [0.4035–0.4358] & 0.64 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 538 & 0.58 [0.5642–0.5965] & 0.36 \\  & **Streed** & & & **441.19** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 2823 & 0.77 [0.7567–0.7733] & 0.67 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 865 & 0.23 [0.2672–0.2244] & 0.33 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 870 & 0.48 [0.4651–0.8468] & 0.67 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 958 & 0.52 [0.5132–0.5349] & 0.33 \\  & **Neutral** & & & **320.20** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 1094 & 0.76 [0.7950–0.7764] & 0.62 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 339 & 0.24 [0.2236–0.2495] & 0.38 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 343 & 0.40 [0.3868–0.4142] & 0.62 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 519 & 0.60 [0.8588–0.6184] & 0.38 \\  & **Streed** & & & **384.25** \\  & 1,1 S–S & 1979 & 0.72 [0.7134–0.7322] & 0.61 \\  & 1,2 S–L & 759 & 0.28 [0.2678–0.2866] & 0.39 \\  & 2,1 L–S & 762 & 0.43 [0.4185–0.4442] & 0.61 \\  & 2,2 L–L & 1009 & 0.57 [0.5580–0.5815] & 0.39 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: \(Cont.\)experiments and tasks seem to hold strongly for only the stressful videos phase. The preponderance of the short IBIs states over the long IBIs states, possibly in line with the indications that state 1 is an auto-attractor, is ascertained by the fact that \(P_{11}\) is greater than \(P_{22}\) for every task.