Temporal Consistency and Movement Effort of Repetitive Reaching During Continuation in Children and Adults
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to match one's movements to an external beat and maintain that rhythm in the absence of the beat suggests sophisticated, well-developed neural control. Children (aged 5-10 years) were compared with adults (aged 18-30 years) during a repetitive reaching task to determine development of this control. Children as young as 5 years exhibited this control. The mean rate of reaching did not differ between groups nor did it differ during the two phases, suggesting an overall ability to internalize and continuously repeat a given pace. Children aged 5-8 years were significantly more variable than children aged 9-10 years and adults, likely attributable to variability in central control processes. We found a possible transition period of temporal control. Children aged 9-10 years begin to exhibit more adult-like levels of variability with respect to temporal consistency and movement effort.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it