MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114242682 · doi:10.1080/00222890309602138

The Role of Video in Facilitating Perception and Action of a Novel Coordination Movement

2003· article· en· W2114242682 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

VenueJournal of Motor Behavior · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Movement (music)SalientVideo feedbackAction (physics)PerceptionPsychologyComputer scienceCommunicationCognitive psychologyProcess (computing)Key (lock)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two groups (n = 10 in each) practiced a novel, bimanual coordination pattern that was demonstrated on video. One of the groups received augmented video feedback of their own responses after each trial following a demonstration. The video-feedback group showed better performance in acquisition and retention than the no-feedback group. On error-detection tests, the video-feedback group was better able to distinguish between correct and incorrect movement patterns. The authors concluded that video feedback helps to make relative phase information salient by aiding the discrimination process. Prepractice ability on a scanning task revealed that individuals who persevered with in-phase-type movements, even though the task demands dictated otherwise, had the most difficulty determining and subsequently performing the required movement. Video feedback helped them to compensate for those difficulties.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.252 · 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