Sentence examples for arm errors from inspiring English sources

The First Error distribution did, however, change across testing, with both groups shifting towards a greater percentage of Adjacent and Prior arm errors, and fewer Other arm errors (χ2 > 15, df(2), p <.001).

Errors were scored in several categories: reference memory errors, first entries on each day into a reference memory arm; errors of commission, repeat entries into arms that had been visited before on that session (i.e., working memory errors), and errors of omission, which represented failures to obtain a reward within the time limit of testing (10 min for each daily session).

The latter score (First Errors) was further broken into types as defined by: 1) Prior goal errors (entry to the arm that last served as goal location); 2) Adjacent arm errors (entry to either arm adjacent to the goal location); or 3) Other errors (random entry into any arm other than the correct goal arm, the prior goal arm, or an arm adjacent to the goal).

The algorithm accurately estimated position (mean cued arm error = 10.0 cm, mean uncued arm error = 10.0 cm, for 1 cm spatial bins, Figure 4A,B).

Figure 4 shows the percentage of trials in which there was: 1) No error; 2) a Prior goal arm error; 3) an Adjacent goal arm error; or, 4) an error to any Other arm.

Errors into the single arm and errors into the adjacent arms (divided by 2) were thus compared for each phase of the study.

Summed across reference memory training, both the NR1 ΔDG and the control mice were almost exactly as likely to make an error to a single as to an adjacent non-rewarded arm (mean errors for NR1 ΔDG mice, 16.38 to the single arm and 15.5 per adjacent arm; mean errors for the control mice, 16.38 per single arm and 15.91 per adjacent arm; F < 1; Fig. 4A).

Dependent measures from the test trials included: number of incorrect arm entries (Errors) during the test trial; mean Latency to reach platform (total latency divided by arms entered, i.e., an indirect index of swim speed); and the position (or type) of the First Error during the test trial (where an error occurred).

These models, inherited from temperature correction models for robot arms, are based on the empirical arm positioning error characterization of several temperatures inside its measuring range and by posterior corrections implemented using an average error approximation.

At the test session (3 h later), only the alternate set contained reward and entries into the sample set arms constituted errors.

Analysis of sequence from microdissected chromosome arms identified errors in both available X. tropicalis assemblies, with at least 15% of v4.1 scaffolds mapped to 7p scaffolds misassembled.