ArticleJournal of computational neuroscience2016
A negative group delay model for feedback-delayed manual tracking performance.
Article in Journal of computational neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of delay and amplification of auditory feedback for walking: anticipation, variability, and frequency adaptation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Synchronization-based control for a collaborative robot.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- Feedback delays can enhance anticipatory synchronization in human-machine interaction.PloS one · 2019Article
- Anticipation from sensation: using anticipating synchronization to stabilize a system with inherent sensory delay.Royal Society open science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We propose that feedback-delayed manual tracking performance is limited by fundamental constraints imposed by the physics of negative group delay. To test this hypothesis, the results of an experiment in which subjects demonstrate both reactive and predictive dynamics are modeled by a linear system with delay-induced negative group delay. Although one of the simplest real-time predictors conceivable, this model explains key components of experimental observations. Most notably, it explains the observation that prediction time linearly increases with feedback delay, up to a certain point when tracking performance deteriorates. It also explains the transition from reactive to predictive behavior with increasing feedback delay. The model contains only one free parameter, the feedback gain, which has been fixed by comparison with one set of experimental observations for the reactive case. Our model provides quantitative predictions that can be tested in further experiments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27530214What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.