Response Time Distribution Analysis of Medium-Sized Datasets in MATLAB
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
Response time data have a positively skewed distribution. The challenge with this is that a measure of central tendency and dispersion does not adequately describe a skewed distribution. A researcher relying on only response time mean and standard deviation could make incorrect conclusions about response time. The best way to analyze response time data is with a distribution analysis. One reason that response time distribution analyses are atypical is that at least 100 trials are recommended per participant and condition. In the current tutorial, we demonstrate a distribution analysis technique that requires as few as 40 participants with 40 trials per condition. This technique involves geometric quantile averaging (GQA) and the quantile maximum probability estimator (QMPE). Each step of the analysis is detailed with a MATLAB script, flexible MATLAB functions, and experimental response time data. Our goal was to lower the barriers to entry for response time distribution analysis so that more researchers will choose to thoroughly examine response time data.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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