MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031365256 · doi:10.1080/00222890903507891

The Correlation Structure of Relative Phase Variability Influences the Occurrence of Phase Transition in Coordination

2010· article· en· W2031365256 on OpenAlexaff
Kjerstin Torre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Motor Behavior · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Dynamics and Properties
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelative phaseCorrelationPhase (matter)Transition (genetics)Phase transitionPsychologyCommunicationStatistical physicsMathematicsPhysicsChemistryCondensed matter physicsGeometryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coordination dynamics framework has presumed that fluctuations in relative phase series produced in bimanual coordination are random. However, results from recent studies have shown that relative phase series contain 1/f(beta) noise (persistent long-range correlations) instead. Using an incremental protocol in line with the paradigmatic bimanual coordination framework, the author shows that the movement frequencies at which individuals spontaneously switch from anti-phase to in-phase coordination are significantly correlated with the intensity of long-range correlations but not with the amplitude of baseline fluctuations in relative phase. This finding illustrates the tangible relationship between present theoretical perspectives and accumulating evidence for 1/f(beta) noise. The author underscores the heuristic potential of systematic efforts to bridge the gap between present theories and the pervasive findings of 1/f(beta) noise.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Motor BehaviorSame topicMaterial Dynamics and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207