Files
Experiments DB Dev 8a18c894dd feat(matlab): add Satterthwaite DF + honest random-slope test to LME reports
Every fitlme-based report (lme_*, paper_*, phase_*, and the variations'
analyze.m) now shows, per effect: residual-DF p, Satterthwaite-DF p, and --
for the interaction -- an HONEST test from a per-animal random-SLOPE model
(day|rat), whose Satterthwaite DF collapses toward the animal count.

New: tdcs_random_slope_interaction.m (shared helper). Wired into tdcs_lme,
tdcs_paper_lme, tdcs_phase_lme, variation_analyze; SUMMARY.csv gains
interaction_p_satt / interaction_p_rs. Regenerated all results/, variations/,
matched-effort outputs.

Key point this surfaces: Satterthwaite ~= residual on the random-INTERCEPT
model (the slope's error is at session level), so it does NOT fix
pseudoreplication; the random-slope model does. Effect: full-range mergeA2
interaction 0.009 -> 0.75 (collapses); unmerge_d0_5 0.015 -> 0.13 (n.s.);
the pooled-control early windows survive honestly (naive_a2_d0_5 0.001 ->
0.028; naive_boxa_d0_5 0.003 -> 0.036). Suite 42/42.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-22 15:45:19 -04:00

69 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext

==============================================================================
VARIATION: naive_boxa_d6_13
==============================================================================
model: behavior ~ stim + day + stim:day + (1|rat) (behavior = success COUNT)
day = training day within window (0 = first analyzed day)
treatment (stim=1): Electrode-Box-B2
control (stim=0): Electrode-Box-A, Electrode-Box-A2, Naive
N = 10 rats, 73 sessions raw day coverage: treat 6..13, control 6..13
(equal day coverage over this window)
==============================================================================
FULL MODEL SUMMARY -- fitlme
==============================================================================
Linear mixed-effects model fit by ML
Model information:
Number of observations 73
Fixed effects coefficients 4
Random effects coefficients 10
Covariance parameters 2
Formula:
behavior ~ 1 + day*stim + (1 | rat)
Model fit statistics:
AIC BIC LogLikelihood Deviance
595.91 609.65 -291.95 583.91
Fixed effects coefficients (95% CIs):
Name Estimate SE tStat DF pValue
{'(Intercept)'} 68.651 4.9672 13.821 69 1.4737e-21
{'day' } 3.1029 0.72917 4.2555 69 6.4463e-05
{'stim' } 20.083 9.0854 2.2105 69 0.030392
{'day:stim' } 0.87369 1.3869 0.62995 69 0.53081
Lower Upper
58.741 78.56
1.6483 4.5576
1.958 38.208
-1.8931 3.6405
Random effects covariance parameters (95% CIs):
Group: rat (10 Levels)
Name1 Name2 Type Estimate
{'(Intercept)'} {'(Intercept)'} {'std'} 10.755
Lower Upper
6.51 17.768
Group: Error
Name Estimate Lower Upper
{'Res Std'} 11.525 9.6827 13.718
effect t(df) / F(df1) p (resid) Satterthwaite: p (df)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
stim x day (interaction) t(69)= 0.63 F(1)= 0.397 p=0.5308 p=0.5309 (df=65)
day (learning) t(69)= 4.26 F(1)= 18.109 p=6.446e-05 p=6.931e-05 (df=64)
stim (main, window start) t(69)= 2.21 F(1)= 4.886 p=0.03039 p=0.0412 (df=17)
interaction 95% CI: [-1.89, +3.64]
HONEST LME (per-animal random slope, day|rat): interaction F(1,8.5)=0.16, p=0.6966
(Satterthwaite DF ~= residual on this random-intercept model; the random-slope
model above is the honest learning-rate test -- DF collapses toward the animal count.)
INTERPRETATION: stim x day interaction n.s. -- slopes parallel (no differential learning rate) (p=0.5308, slope diff=+0.87)
Paper (N=24): interaction t(227)=2.68, F(1)=7.12, p=0.008.