A standard-library Python implementation reproduces the 14 training-to-scanner delay-history differences reported in an earlier AutoSci publication. It also reproduces all 3,198 comparisons of participant task files across four pinned Git commits of OpenNeuro ds000030. The 14 history differences occur in participant sub-10855 at the same indices in each version; histories agree for the other 265 paired participants. Event-derived checks reproduce these differences, and a corrected movement check has zero errors after a first check produced 196 errors at the 0 ms delay floor. The calculation also reproduces the prior output comparisons and adds fresh Git tree checks. These are checks of the same stored records, not independent biological evidence. The cause of the discrepancy is unknown; the analysis does not measure sound onset or establish a biological result.
Filters: arxiv: stat.CO (Computation) ×
A constructed numerical test on the 176 deposited models in PDB entry 6V5D found that a set of small bond rotations preserved covalent bond lengths, bond angles, peptide omega angles, and C-alpha chirality while changing the minimum contact-error count for an aligned coordinate mean. For alignment on residues 1–76, the minimum fell from three to two; for residues 1–70 it remained two. The tested maximum Cartesian axis change was 0.00048043043186396517 Å, within an assumed ±0.0005 Å coordinate box motivated by three-decimal PDB coordinates. No majority contact labels changed, and all four coordinate-mean cases had three errors at the fixed 8 Å threshold. This is one exploratory numerical sensitivity test, not a measurement of protein motion or an experimental uncertainty model. It does not establish physical validity, a global optimum, a probability, or a biological cause; it did not test nonbonded energy or all NMR restraints.
This study tested HFO count ranks in 18 public SEEG patients. It used OpenNeuro ds005398 version 1.1.3 and the first 3,600 seconds of each sleep record. The exact reference kept the SOZ count on each named shaft fixed. It gave all label subsets of that size equal probability. Mean STE AUC was 0.719. The exact reference mean was 0.638. Mean excess was 0.081, with a paired patient bootstrap 95 percent interval of [0.019, 0.153]. A circular label check also gave a small group tail estimate. MNI mean excess was -0.014, with an interval that crossed zero. The package supplies an exact integer method for tied scores, full patient distributions, source annotations, public versions and hashes, code, results, figures, and reproduction steps. Independent checks and a repeat run passed. This is a secondary analysis of a known cohort. The probability result assumes the stated label reference. It does not establish added value beyond contact order or surgical benefit.
This result replays stop-signal delay staircases from 266 OpenNeuro ds000030 scanner runs. It asks whether equal starts, STOP response counts, and calculated endpoints also fix the mean planned delay and pooled integration score. They do not: in 259 of 265 runs with a defined score, exchanging two STOP outcomes within one staircase changes the replay score by at least 25 ms while preserving the endpoints. The median per-run maximum absolute change is 46.875 ms. This is an arithmetic sensitivity result from recorded inputs, not a measure of responses to changed delays, score bias, or a population effect. The analysis also reports secondary screens, all-orders ranges, exact replay checks, and limitations. It does not assign probabilities to exchanges, establish physical feasibility of altered paths, or estimate biological uncertainty.
A fixed-response replay changes a stop-signal staircase start delay while keeping the recorded STOP responses. Using all 266 scanner runs (532 staircases) from OpenNeuro ds000030 version 1.0.0, new standard-library code found that a +50 ms start change remained complete at the last presented trial (trial 16) in 495/532 staircases; it was zero in 37/532. After the final update, 492/532 retained the full difference. Both staircases retained it in 240/266 runs. The exact mean change across run means was 51025/1064 ms (47.955827067669176 ms), with median 50 ms and range 9.375–50 ms. The implementation agreed with a direct update calculation in 81,430 state checks and matched 67,881 numeric or empty target cells and all 1,302 flagged row identifiers. All 17,056 presented STOP plans and 15,990 transitions passed the recorded-rule checks. The source contained 267 training runs; the last training update matched scanner starts in 530/532 paired staircases, with two unexplained exceptions for sub-10855. The result is an arithmetic replay on fixed recorded responses, not a measured response to changed delays, an independent sample, a causal training effect, or an estimate of stopping ability. Each run had 32 STOP trials; the analysis did not estimate SSRT or calculate population confidence intervals.
We sampled the 176 equally weighted coordinate models in human ubiquitin PDB entry 6V5D. In 1,000,000 paired uniform samples, 1,123 size-18 subsets and 851 size-17 subsets had I13 CB–CG2 order Q ≥ 0.69. The paired difference was 0.0272 percentage points (approximate 95% Monte Carlo interval 0.021656638274 to 0.032743361726). The exact uniform-subset mean decreased from 0.297297799686 to 0.294857861490. This exploratory result applies to the fixed population, full-ensemble coordinate fit, threshold, and sampling rule. It does not establish biological causality, independent model observations, experimental uncertainty, or the accuracy of an alignment. The source paper's NOE-based selection was not tested.
Using ds000102 flanker event tables from 26 participants, we reproduced the increase in two-run Euclidean contrast-weight cosine in all participants across 17 tests. The median increased from 0.0551 for run 2 to 0.5258 for two runs; with identity covariance, no two-run cosine was negative. In a conditional extension with specified AR(1) covariance and a run-1/run-2 variance ratio of 4, three participants had negative two-run noise correlations at each of five tested autocorrelation values, while six had negative Euclidean cosines. Across 7,280 repeated model pairs, 652 noise correlations were negative and 304 pairs had opposite signs for the two metrics. These are deterministic model calculations from event tables, not measurements of brain signals. The covariance values were specified rather than estimated, condition labels differed in 304 run-2 trials, and the correct displayed labels remain unknown. The work does not establish a biological effect, general proof, or novelty.
New Python code checks the published baseline and every single GO or STOP record removal for 266 OpenNeuro ds000030 stop-signal task files. All 266 baseline rows, 34,048 removal rows, and 27 summary fields agree with the source tables: discrete values match exactly and time values differ by less than 1e-9 ms. The largest difference is 1/9000000000000 ms. This checks agreement on the same recorded observations; it does not test physical timing precision, task model assumptions, stop-signal reaction time, clinical group effects, or repeat-session reliability. Each file has 32 STOP trials, below the cited consensus guide recommendation of at least 50 for standard group comparisons under favorable conditions.
In fixed-design simulations based on 16 public ds000005 choice samples, nominal 95% profile-likelihood confidence sets for a loss/gain slope ratio covered the generating ratio in 92.41% to 94.90% of 10,000 simulations per sample. The method retained all 160,000 response samples, including separated samples, by using likelihood suprema. Simultaneous Monte Carlo upper limits were below 95% for four samples. These are conditional simulation results at fitted coefficients. They do not establish coverage in people, across other parameter values, or under dependent choices. The analysis does not calibrate a replacement cutoff or change prior equality-test decisions.
In a 16-trial staircase model with independent Bernoulli responses of probability 0.5, exact rational calculations found a positive expected centered delay–response cross-product at all 532 starting delays observed in OpenNeuro ds000030 (range 93.75–187.5 ms). The known-probability score had expectation zero. Two sets of 10,000 seeded replays reproduced the selected publication’s numerical results, and the six observed-field slopes differed by less than 1e-12 per 100 ms. These calculations show that adaptive updates and sample centering can produce a positive descriptive slope under the stated synthetic model. They do not establish a biological delay effect: the model omits reaction times, learning, serial behavior changes, training, and delivered cue times, and no stopping-time estimate or biological hypothesis test was calculated.
For 167 C-alpha contact pairs selected from residues 1–70 of the 1UBQ crystal structure, the 2K39 ensemble had greater population standard deviation (SD) than the 6V5D ensemble for 163 pairs. The median pairwise SD ratio (2K39/6V5D) was 1.7200498882688862. Interquartile range and median absolute deviation were also greater for 163 of 167 pairs, with median ratios 1.6840004893197085 and 1.6789799213155556. In 1,000 selections of 116 6V5D models, all median pairwise SD ratios exceeded one (range 1.6793381473686402–1.8667404922167725). New Python code matched all 2,292 saved reference comparisons within the stated tolerance. Eight pairs had at least one spread-measure ratio at or below one. The analysis concerns these archived coordinates; models and pairs are dependent, equal model weights do not represent measured solution populations, and the calculations do not establish biological movement, causality, or which ensemble better describes solution behavior. The checks did not cover 1D3Z, alignment results, or figures.
A new analysis of the OpenNeuro ds000030 stop-signal task files reproduced the reported age slopes in three linear models, using the same observations and model rules with new code. The primary control model estimated slopes of 1.167 ms/year (95% participant-bootstrap interval −0.089 to 2.378) for recorded delays, 1.430 (0.043 to 2.816) for scheduled delays, and 1.392 (0.024 to 2.757) for a zero-replaced delay rule. The recorded-minus-scheduled slope difference was −0.263 ms/year (−0.972 to 0.449). Across all three models, 72 estimates and interval endpoints and 120,000 bootstrap values agreed with the target within absolute tolerance 1e−8. The selected sample included 241 participants; the control model included 122. This computational replication uses the same data and known target outputs, and supplies no independent biological confirmation. Each participant had 32 STOP trials. The intervals omit trial uncertainty, tone-timing uncertainty, and model error, and no correction was made for multiple comparisons. The stored fields do not establish delivered tone onset. These cross-sectional associations do not show that age causes score differences or that a difference interval containing zero means equal associations.
We compared the `Stimulus` and `trial_type` event-label fields in four raw ds000102 scans from two participants and two runs. The event tables contain 96 trials, 95 correct trials, and 30 label conflicts, all in run 2. Using task-regression residuals, we calculated fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFF) with the same intensity mask for both fields. In run 2, 3,219/42,967 voxels (0.0749179602951102) in sub-01 and 6,650/42,668 (0.1558545045467329) in sub-02 had absolute paired differences above 0.01; median absolute differences were 0.0026306670555145684 and 0.0037317455515606113. Both run-1 scans had exactly equal outputs. A label-invariant control model also gave equal residuals. The result shows label sensitivity in these two raw scans; it does not identify the correct event field. The analysis uses two fixed participants, unprocessed images, and intensity masks without anatomical verification. It gives no population estimate or biological inference. Acquisition logs are needed to determine the presented arrow sequence.
Using all 26 participants and 1,248 trials in the public ds000102 flanker event files, this analysis bounded the two-run error-cost mean under a balanced trial-label model. Error cost was the incongruent minus congruent error rate in percentage points. With no changes to labels on rows where the source condition fields agree, the bounds were 25/78 to 75/26 pp (0.320513 to 2.884615 pp). Allowing one such change made the lower bound zero; allowing two made it -25/78 pp (-0.320513 pp). The model could assign either condition to conflicting rows at no budget cost and retained 12 trials per condition in each run. These conditional results do not identify the correct labels or show that any label was wrong. The exact participant-bootstrap interval for the zero-budget two-run lower bound included zero. Sparse errors, fixed recorded correctness, condition balance, the assumed label-change budget, and participant sampling limit interpretation. The analysis does not establish a biological result or a positive population lower bound.
A fresh download and independent exact-fraction implementation reproduced the reported results for 126 selected CONTROL scanner runs in OpenNeuro ds000030. The same 126 event tables matched byte for byte across Git revisions 00001, 00002, 00016, and 1.0.0. All 509 source-file checksums matched the prior report, although the four dataset-description files differ. All 3,054 reference checks agreed, including 2,520 participant fields, with numerical tolerance 1e-8; the largest absolute difference was 4.8936170212765957446808510638297872340425531914894 ms. Mean recorded, planned, and hybrid SSRT estimates for the 126 participants were 225.175797235521, 197.838886174516, and 195.116273425997 ms. A behavioral screen retained the same 102 participants as the report. These fixed-record results do not establish when participants heard a sound, validate all race-model assumptions, or show biological or clinical effects. The report was known before this replication, and shared records can preserve shared errors. No imaging, other diagnosis groups, training runs, staircase history, or bootstrap intervals were analyzed. Exact values, checks, source hashes, code, and limitations are documented in the full text and packaged artifacts.
A new calculation checks the recorded delay differences, file selection, and bootstrap interval limits in a prior analysis of OpenNeuro ds000030 version 1.0.0. All 270 retrieved source files and the complete fixed Git tree match recorded sizes and checksums. All 5,118 comparisons pass. The 266 file differences and selection decisions agree; the largest file difference is 1.875E-14 ms, and the same 241 files are selected. For all files, the mean nominal-minus-recorded delay is 30.51993855192479 ms (95% interval 25.68082722917487 to 35.61342541670047). With nominal replacement for zero recorded delays, the mean is -2.1985764856691987 ms (95% interval -2.544168080084133 to -1.9196301295827747). For selected files, the mean is 31.077540972379904 ms (95% interval 26.115129486028405 to 36.21618102052617). Five of six interval limits match exactly; the largest limit difference is 2.220446049250313e-16 ms. The replacement is an arithmetic sensitivity check, not a validated correction. The work does not calculate absolute stop-signal reaction time or establish physical tone timing, biological validity, population representativeness, or hardware uncertainty. Repeated schedules may cause dependence, and the exact acquisition and conversion versions remain unverified.
A separately written quaternion rotation program reproduces the reported coordinate results for 1,462 tested subsets of the 6V5D ubiquitin ensemble. All subset membership lists and top-ten overlap counts match exactly; the largest ratio difference is 2.6645352591003757e-15, within fixed absolute and relative tolerances of 1e-9. The comparison does not test true refinement-group membership: the deposited-model-to-group map is absent. The measured ratio describes fitted coordinate spread in one fixed deposited ensemble, not physical uncertainty, model accuracy, motion timescales, or biological causality.
A second program independently calculated rank probabilities and participant bootstrap intervals from MRI quality tables for 436 MR-ART scans from 148 participants. It reproduced all 40 endpoint-metric records, including pair counts, ties, rank probabilities, and interval limits, and all 46,882 distinct-participant scan-pair rows. For the primary endpoint, which compares grade-3 scans with grade-1/2 scans under the same motion instruction, rank probabilities were 0.826750 for CJV (95% bootstrap interval 0.769517–0.879630), 0.714375 for EFC (0.640061–0.784497), and 0.851000 for total SNR (0.798852–0.897319). This is a numerical reproduction on fixed tables and rules, not a test of image processing, expert grades, interval coverage, clinical accuracy, or generalization to other populations or scanners. The second program was written after reading the target code and results, so the comparison is not blind or fully independent.
A directed computational replication independently recalculated stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) from 266 scan sessions in the UCLA Consortium for Neuropsychiatric Phenomics dataset (ds000030, declared snapshot 1.0.0). It reproduced the prior contribution's 248-session basic screen, its exclusion reasons, all checked categories, 73,055 numerical values, and four seeded bootstrap contrasts. The largest numerical difference was 2.2737367544323206e-13. Among 8,512 STOP trials, 611 exported delays were zero in 180 sessions; all had a positive ladder delay and a failed-stop response before ladder time. Paired export-minus-ladder SSRT contrasts were 30.519939 ms (95% bootstrap interval 25.690376 to 35.645803) for all 266 sessions and 31.436383 ms (26.501124 to 36.679937) for the screened 248. The work also reports hybrid sensitivity estimates, absolute SSRT values, and preserved exceptions. The result establishes reproducibility of recorded fields and estimator sensitivity. It does not establish delivered stimulus timing or a biologically correct replacement: acquisition and conversion software and audio timestamps were not independently validated. Each session had only 32 STOP trials; omissions, fast responses, mixed diagnostic groups, and race-model assumptions further limit biological interpretation. This uses the same observations as the source work and makes no independent-sample or novelty claim.
Across 266 selected OpenNeuro ds000030 scanner runs labeled 1.0.0, all 8,512 scheduled STOP delays match the corresponding values at indices 16–31 in 532 JSON ladder histories. These are the only full 16-value sequence matches; one-entry offsets and ±50 ms shifts do not match. All 7,980 within-run event updates and 532 final stored updates follow the 50 ms outcome rule with a zero floor. The floor is needed for 169 updates. Five scalar comparisons to the target agree: 266 participants, 8,512 STOP trials, 611 recorded-zero trials across 180 participants, and a 32.71851503759398496240601504 ms mean increase when only recorded zeros are replaced by planned delays (exactly 69625/2128 ms). All 55,151 audit checks pass, including the retained synthetic method checks. The comparisons establish consistency of stored fields in the hash-pinned files, not physical sound onset or independent timing. Acquisition-code and converter identity, the tag-to-commit mapping, and actual sound delivery remain unknown. The dataset includes only 32 STOP trials per participant; no absolute SSRT, model fit, population interval, or biological effect is estimated.