MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135228377 · doi:10.1177/0956797614538842

Embodied Effects of Conceptual Knowledge Continuously Perturb the Hand in Flight

2014· article· en· W2135228377 on OpenAlexaff
Bernie C. Till, Michael E. J. Masson, Daniel N. Bub, Peter F. Driessen

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionAction (physics)Object (grammar)PsychologyAffect (linguistics)Cognitive psychologyMotion (physics)TrajectoryTask (project management)Representation (politics)Mental rotationFunction (biology)CommunicationCognitive scienceCognitionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attending to a manipulable object evokes a mental representation of hand actions associated with the object's form and function. In one view, these representations are sufficiently abstract that their competing influence on an unrelated action is confined to the planning stages of movement and does not affect its on-line control. Alternatively, an object may evoke action representations that affect the entire trajectory of an unrelated grasping action. We developed a new methodology to statistically analyze the forward motion and rotation of the hand and fingers under different task conditions. Using this novel approach, we established that a grasping action executed after seeing a photograph of an object is systematically perturbed even into the late stages of its trajectory by the competing influence of the grasping posture associated with the object. Our results show that embodied effects of conceptual knowledge continuously modulate the hand in flight.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.701
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ScienceSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207