MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7053274022

TAT-HUM: Trajectory Analysis Toolkit for Human Movements in Python

2023· article· en· W7053274022 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)Scripting languageKinematicsMovement (music)Process (computing)TrajectoryMotion capture
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behavioral research relies on evaluating measurable behaviours to extract their underlying social, cognitive, and neurophysiological mechanisms. Although traditional methods commonly involve simple measures of discrete movements (e.g., RT of keypresses), analyses of dynamic human movement patterns have shown to reveal additional insights. Effectively extracting information from movement trajectories patterns can be challenging because of the complex and dynamic nature of the movements. The current presentation outlines a custom Python toolkit for analyzing human manual movements and extracting relevant information. This toolkit can process single discrete rapid aiming movements in two- (e.g., cursor pointing) and three-dimensional (e.g., manual pointing) space, as well as cyclical movements (e.g., Fitts’s Law task). This toolkit uses various Python libraries, including NumPy and SciPy, and provides a set of frequently used functions for analyzing movement trajectory data. To ensure versatility and user-friendliness, the toolkit offers two approaches: an automated method that processes raw data and generates relevant measurements without intervention, and a manual approach that allows users to selectively utilize different functions according to their specific requirements. The results of a behavioral experiment based on the spatial cueing paradigm was conducted and will be reported to demonstrate the practical application of this toolkit. Readers are encouraged to access the publicly available data and analysis scripts to gain insight into kinematic analysis for human movements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: Software
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.031

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207