MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101452396 · doi:10.1123/mcj.8.2.121

Effect of Movement Termination in Single- and Dual-Phase Pointing Tasks

2004· article· en· W2101452396 on OpenAlex
Éric Roy, Linda E. Rohr, Patricia L. Weir

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMotor Control · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMovement (music)Task (project management)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)Focus (optics)Dual (grammatical number)Phase (matter)Artificial intelligenceSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experiments are reported that focus on manipulating both the context and the spatial precision of a computer-pointing task. Single goal-directed actions are compared to dual-phase tasks, where participants are required to sequentially attain two goal locations. Results support the idea that for movements in series, movement planning, and online feedback, control can occur simultaneously. Additionally, for single-phase tasks and the final phase of dual-phase tasks, the termination requirement influences the temporal components of the movement. The effects of termination and movement context appear to hold regardless of the spatial precision of the task. This suggests that the effects of spatial precision and movement termination are independent, although both have an impact on the deceleration time for goal-directed movements.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.248 · 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