Nonetheless, one might ask how well each component alone could explain the behavioral changes between the two speed-accuracy regimes.
Beyond correlation, these changes in the evidence-independent neural signal explained the changes observed in the behavior between the two speed-accuracy regimes.
To test whether motion strength influenced the buildup rate differently between the two speed-accuracy regimes, we fit the expanded model: (3) y b u = β 0 + β 1 C + β 2 I S A + β 3 I S A C where y bu is the buildup rate at each motion strength (see above), C is the motion strength, and I SA is an indicator variable for the speed-accuracy regime (1 for speed, 0 for accuracy).
But the wider gaps between the four speeds become more apparent when drivers switch to the self-shifting sport mode.
Toggle between the three speed modes (1, 2 or 3 m.p.h). on the fly (so to speak), but don't step on the brake pedal or throttle.
We revised our statistical analysis when comparing measurements between the three speed groups.
Interestingly, the transitions from linearity match very closely to the divisions between the three speed groups as defined above, providing additional support for these three speed groups.
A comparison between the three speed groups also displays statistical significance (Kruskal Wallis-ANOVA, p values of 0.0015 and 0.0014 for AEP and PEP, respectively).
The typical mean speed for such observations is about 300 400 km/s and the difference between the two predominant speeds is about 150 200 km/s.
The first wave, post-war, was blighted by technical problems, not least the issue of keeping two projectors perfectly in synchronisation; the slightest discrepancy between the two projector speeds could ruin the 3D effect and make the film unwatchable.
