MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988308739 · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-114.6.411

Evidence for Slowing as a Function of Index of Difficulty in Young Adults With Down Syndrome

2009· article· en· W1988308739 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsDown Syndrome Research FoundationUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Typically developingRegression analysisDown syndromeRegressionAudiologyPsychologyStatisticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineMathematicsDevelopmental psychologyComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speed-accuracy trade-offs in persons with Down syndrome and typically developing controls were tested with a Fitts' task. Movement time scaled linearly with index of difficulty in both groups, and there were no accuracy differences. Persons with Down syndrome were slower than typically developing individuals. Regression analysis on movement time and index of difficulty showed a nearly two-fold higher regression coefficient and a nearly three-fold larger intercept value in the Down syndrome group. The dwell time on a target was much longer for Down syndrome persons but scaled with index of difficulty in about the same percentage for participants in both groups. Because of differences primarily related to scaling, we conclude that mechanisms of motor control are similar in Down syndrome and typically developing groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it