Files
experiments-database/analysis/matlab/variations/naive_boxa_d0_13/result.txt
T
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_d0_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 = 11 rats, 138 sessions raw day coverage: treat 0..13, control 0..13
(equal day coverage over this window)
==============================================================================
FULL MODEL SUMMARY -- fitlme
==============================================================================
Linear mixed-effects model fit by ML
Model information:
Number of observations 138
Fixed effects coefficients 4
Random effects coefficients 11
Covariance parameters 2
Formula:
behavior ~ 1 + day*stim + (1 | rat)
Model fit statistics:
AIC BIC LogLikelihood Deviance
1172.3 1189.8 -580.14 1160.3
Fixed effects coefficients (95% CIs):
Name Estimate SE tStat DF pValue
{'(Intercept)'} 15.925 4.1997 3.792 134 0.00022515
{'day' } 6.7124 0.401 16.739 134 1.2129e-34
{'stim' } 11.848 7.9908 1.4827 134 0.1405
{'day:stim' } 1.3064 0.75238 1.7363 134 0.084806
Lower Upper
7.619 24.231
5.9193 7.5055
-3.9564 27.652
-0.1817 2.7945
Random effects covariance parameters (95% CIs):
Group: rat (11 Levels)
Name1 Name2 Type Estimate
{'(Intercept)'} {'(Intercept)'} {'std'} 8.76
Lower Upper
5.1941 14.774
Group: Error
Name Estimate Lower Upper
{'Res Std'} 15.18 13.424 17.167
effect t(df) / F(df1) p (resid) Satterthwaite: p (df)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
stim x day (interaction) t(134)= 1.74 F(1)= 3.015 p=0.08481 p=0.08489 (df=129)
day (learning) t(134)= 16.74 F(1)=280.201 p=1.213e-34 p=2.161e-34 (df=131)
stim (main, window start) t(134)= 1.48 F(1)= 2.198 p=0.1405 p=0.1519 (df=23)
interaction 95% CI: [-0.18, +2.79]
HONEST LME (per-animal random slope, day|rat): interaction F(1,25.3)=2.32, p=0.1403
(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=0.08481, slope diff=+1.31)
Paper (N=24): interaction t(227)=2.68, F(1)=7.12, p=0.008.