MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2744731091

Asymetrical bilateral limb movements induce unequal tactile temporal order judgments

2011· article· en· W2744731091 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Hermosillo, Paul van Donkelaar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovement (music)Contrast (vision)Task (project management)AmplitudeSensory systemMotor planningPsychologyCommunicationCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsAcousticsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When performing limb movements, motor planning signals are used to attenuate sensory signals to allow for differentiation between self- and externally-imposed cutaneous sensations. It has been previously shown that crossing the arms increases error rates of spatially-localized temporal order judgments (TOJs). We investigated whether or not the amplitude of the movement affected the ability to perform a temporal order judgment task. We found that during bilateral movements, the hand generating larger amplitude movements led to increased error rate relative to the shorter movements and stationary conditions. By contrast, we observed no difference between error rates for either hand during symmetrical movements. Taken together, this implies that some aspect of planning movements which vary in amplitude interacts with the decision-making processing associated with judgments of temporal order.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→