Kinematic Analysis of Early Online Control of Goal-Directed Reaches: A Novel Movement Perturbation Study
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
This study was designed to examine the importance of vision to corrective processes associated with a mechanical perturbation to the limb during goal-directed aiming. With a hand held stylus, under vision and no vision conditions, performers reached to a target represented by the intersection of perpendicular lines. The stylus was connected to an air compressor and engineered such that 80 ms following movement initiation reaches were perturbed by a short air burst either in the direction of, or opposite to, the movement. Spatial position analysis of the limb at early kinematic landmarks revealed that the single direction bursts were successful in advancing and hindering the movement progress. Furthermore, within subject trial-to-trial variability analysis indicated that performers adopted different control strategies for dealing with the perturbations depending on the availability of vision. The present findings suggest that a continuous form of online control is exercised during the early portions of the aiming trajectories. This form of control may be mediated by visual or proprioceptive information.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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