MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166772806 · doi:10.1093/geronb/55.2.p85

Effects of Aging on Automatic and Effortful Processes in Bimanual Coordination

2000· article· en· W2166772806 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series B · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsPsychologyMotor coordinationRelative phaseDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyMovement (music)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPhase (matter)NeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experiments are reported that compared younger and older adults on their performance of two bimanual temporal coordination tasks at varying movement speeds. In many cases, older adults performed as well as younger adults at all speeds of an in-phase coordination pattern and at slow speeds of an anti-phase pattern for both coordination accuracy and stability. Age differences tended to emerge most prominently at high speeds for the anti-phase pattern. These findings are consistent with the aging literature regarding automatic and effortful processing distinctions, suggesting that relative age differences become magnified when effortful resources are required for motor performance.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.261 · 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