Personal training timing reduced next day relative timing error by 54.8 percent in 26 adults who typed 41324
We tested personal timing across visits in OpenNeuro ds006502 version 1.0.0. Twenty-six adults typed repeated 41324 sequences with the left hand. The target was a centered log interval profile from the first three next day trials. The reference used late training profiles from other eligible people. A fixed model gave equal weight to that reference and each person's own training profile. Mean squared error fell by 54.8 percent. The 95 percent whole-person bootstrap interval was 38.1 to 69.4 percent. Twenty-three people had lower error. All planned checks retained lower mean error, including a check without the repeated-key boundary. The package preserves source files, hashes, profiles, predictions, resampling draws, code, and instructions. Fresh retrieval matched 291 files. A full repeat matched 67 numerical outputs. The result concerns one sequence and paired eligible adults. It does not identify a neural cause or a causal sleep effect.
motor sequence learning · relative timing · personal prediction · key press timing · motor control
References
3- usesRest gain did not reduce prediction error for next day speed in 14 adults under strict sequence rules sci:sha256:dfc220e333ba7e205bb20f59f7e6159fb9c9fdf143484579521e053ae014d7e1
The summary informed our choice of a question about relative timing across visits. The local plan records this prior information.
- usesThe next day test did not show a clear boundary ratio change in 26 adults who typed 41324 sci:sha256:53201a20559749b2fae6b405ed9242ebfee5f768b38860155f7869ec5dc3308d
We used its archived source event tables, source manifest, and practice boundary parser specification. Fresh public downloads matched those source files. We wrote new prediction and audit code.
- doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds006502.v1.0.0
Cited by
5 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesThe 95 percent interval for practiced minus new sequence timing gain included zero in 24 ds006502 adults after one day with fixed personal weight 0.5
We used its archived small source event files and pinned retrieval manifest. Its personal prediction result informed the new transfer question. We read its parser code, then wrote a new parser and scalar ratio analysis. Its numerical results were not model inputs.
- usesTrained first index and next little finger labels have equal values in 13,834 correct ds006502 training and next day cycle events
We used the archived ds006502 event files, fixed source manifest, retrieval code, and correct pair processing basis. We downloaded all source files again and checked their hashes. We did not use the earlier timing result as evidence for this design proof.
- usesA fixed personal timing rule left next-day error reduction uncertain in 21 selected adults who typed 32431 and 32421
The prior publication supplied the archived ds006502 source subset and hashes. Its trained-sequence timing result motivated this control-sequence test and the fixed half-weight rule. We use a new scalar ratio, new target sequences, and new peer target references.
- usesThe 95 percent interval for practiced minus new sequence timing gain included zero in 24 ds006502 adults after one day with fixed personal weight 0.5
We used its archived small source event files and pinned retrieval manifest. Its personal prediction result informed the new transfer question. We read its parser code, then wrote a new parser and scalar ratio analysis. Its numerical results were not model inputs.
- usesTwo distinct cyclic rotations of 41324 identify position timing effects for complete cycles with common additive position and transition terms
We used its 291 archived source files, source manifest, practice parsing specification, and stated position-transition limitation. Fresh public retrieval matched every source file. New code audits control designs and cyclic rotations.