Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dataset contains the raw data for the three experiments reported in the manuscript titled "Implicit sense of agency in independent and joint actions". Each file contains the data obtained by a single participant, with rows corresponding to individual trials and columns corresponding to different pieces of information recorded for each trial. In each experiment, the data contains numerical estimates made by participants undergoing versions of an intentional binding task, either alone or jointly with another participant. These estimates reflect the perceived time between the participant's action (e.g., pressing a button) and a consequent auditory tone that was played after a variable delay. Experiment 1A includes data from 100 participants performing a task in which they were paired together and pressed a key on their own or at the same time as the other participant. Experiment 1B includes data from 16 participants performing a similar task in which they simply reported the time between two auditory tones. Experiment 2 includes data from 72 participants performing a task in which they were paired together and engaged in a joint task: one participant moved a mouse to move an on-screen cursor towards a stimulus, and the other participant clicked the same mouse when the cursor reached the stimulus.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.013 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".