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 OpenAlexafffund
Éric Roy, Linda E. Rohr, Patricia L. Weir

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.012
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

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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMotor ControlSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207