Rapid Compensation for Noisy Voluntary Movements in Adults with Primary Tic Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been proposed that tics and premonitory urges in primary tic disorders (PTD), like Tourette syndrome, are a manifestation of sensorimotor noise. However, patients with tics show no obvious movement imprecision in everyday life. One reason could be that patients have strategies to compensate for noise that disrupts performance (ie, noise that is task-relevant). OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to unmask effects of elevated sensorimotor noise on the variability of voluntary movements in patients with PTD. METHODS: We tested 30 adult patients with PTD (23 male) and 30 matched controls in a reaching task designed to unmask latent noise. Subjects reached to targets whose shape allowed for variability either in movement direction or extent. This enabled us to decompose variability into task-relevant versus less task-relevant components, where the latter should be less affected by compensatory strategies than the former. In alternating blocks, the task-relevant target dimension switched, allowing us to explore the temporal dynamics with which participants adjusted movement variability to changes in task demands. RESULTS: Both groups accurately reached to targets, and adjusted movement precision based on target shape. However, when task-relevant dimensions of the target changed, patients initially produced movements that were more variable than controls, before regaining precision after several reaches. This effect persisted across repeated changes in the task-relevant dimension across the experiment, and therefore did not reflect an effect of novelty, or differences in learning. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that patients with PTD generate noisier voluntary movements compared with controls, but rapidly compensate according to current task demands. © 2024 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".