<p>Antagonism pattern p-value variation as function of sample number for different level of noise (results obtained on simulated datasets).</p
Results of an within-participant pairwise comparison among the three noise testing conditions.</p
<p>Statistical significance of changes in error frequency observed between experimental blocks.</p
<p>Relative response frequencies of the response categories in the experimental conditions.</p
<p>Simulation results at significance level with different methods for phenotypic data generated fr...
Example MNIST stimuli at different noise levels, from left to right: 0%, 50%, 75%, 88%, 94%, 97%. In...
<p>Model parameters varied in the simulations with the range of parameter values used in each simula...
<p>(a1) Experimental (S-0-30); (a2) Numerical (S-0-30); (b1) Experimental (S-0-60); (b2) Numerical (...
Number of experiments, sampling strategy, variation of models and layers, and performance against pr...
At each noise allocation, 100 iterations were conducted. The red dashed line is at the nominal p-val...
<p>Behavior of the fluctuation model parameters in the experiments performed under stationary condit...
Performance statistics of the tested algorithms at different activity levels.</p
<p>A–C) Means of the 50 estimations versus AR(1) coefficient at three levels of SD of AR(1) noise. D...
The testing accuracies and execution time for six classifiers on different-scale datasets with noise...
Allocation of the 100 generated connectivity matrices varied from 5:95 to 95:5, increasing in increm...
<p>Specifically, Determinism is reported in the cases of no noise (stars), noise (triangles), nois...
Results of an within-participant pairwise comparison among the three noise testing conditions.</p
<p>Statistical significance of changes in error frequency observed between experimental blocks.</p
<p>Relative response frequencies of the response categories in the experimental conditions.</p
<p>Simulation results at significance level with different methods for phenotypic data generated fr...
Example MNIST stimuli at different noise levels, from left to right: 0%, 50%, 75%, 88%, 94%, 97%. In...
<p>Model parameters varied in the simulations with the range of parameter values used in each simula...
<p>(a1) Experimental (S-0-30); (a2) Numerical (S-0-30); (b1) Experimental (S-0-60); (b2) Numerical (...
Number of experiments, sampling strategy, variation of models and layers, and performance against pr...
At each noise allocation, 100 iterations were conducted. The red dashed line is at the nominal p-val...
<p>Behavior of the fluctuation model parameters in the experiments performed under stationary condit...
Performance statistics of the tested algorithms at different activity levels.</p
<p>A–C) Means of the 50 estimations versus AR(1) coefficient at three levels of SD of AR(1) noise. D...
The testing accuracies and execution time for six classifiers on different-scale datasets with noise...
Allocation of the 100 generated connectivity matrices varied from 5:95 to 95:5, increasing in increm...
<p>Specifically, Determinism is reported in the cases of no noise (stars), noise (triangles), nois...
Results of an within-participant pairwise comparison among the three noise testing conditions.</p
<p>Statistical significance of changes in error frequency observed between experimental blocks.</p
<p>Relative response frequencies of the response categories in the experimental conditions.</p