The role of feedback in the production of skilled finger sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Actions involving fine control of the hand, for example grasping an object, rely heavily on sensory information from the fingertips. While the integration of feedback during execution of individual movements is well understood, less is known about the use of sensory feedback in the control of skilled movement sequences. To address this gap, we trained participants to produce sequences of finger movements on a keyboard-like device over a four-day training period. Participants received haptic, visual, and auditory feedback indicating the occurrence of each finger press. We then either transiently delayed or advanced the feedback for a single press by a small amount of time (30 or 60 ms). We observed that participants rapidly adjusted their ongoing finger press by either accelerating or prolonging the ongoing press, in accordance with the direction of the perturbation. Furthermore, we could show that this rapid behavioural modulation was driven by haptic feedback. While these feedback-driven adjustments reduced in size with practice, they were still clearly present at the end of training. In contrast to the directionally-specific effect we observed on the perturbed press, a feedback perturbation resulted in a delayed onset of the subsequent presses irrespective of perturbation direction or feedback modality. This observation is consistent with a hierarchical organization of skilled movement sequences, with different levels reacting distinctly to sensory perturbations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".