Table 1.
Hypotheses of VI performance with lowest ΔAICc.
| Hypothesis | c | RSS | ΔAICc |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch 1 (PND 58-62) | |||
| ReSHR= ReWIS | 36 | 306.78 | 0.00 |
| None | 37 | 306.12 | 5.49 |
| kWIS = kWKY | 36 | 458.24 | 36.11 |
| kSHR = kWIS, ReWIS = ReWKY, | 35 | 496.05 | 37.78 |
| kSHR = kWIS | 36 | 495.73 | 43.19 |
| Epoch 2 (PND 89-93) | |||
| None | 37 | 581.35 | 0.00 |
| ReWIS = ReWKY | 36 | 738.84 | 15.89 |
| kSHR = kWIS, ReWIS = ReWKY, | 35 | 837.20 | 21.67 |
| kSHR = kWIS | 36 | 807.35 | 23.87 |
| ReSHR= ReWIS | 36 | 904.42 | 34.09 |
Note. The label of each hypothesis stipulates the constraints on mean parameter estimates. c is the number of free parameters in each hypothesis; RSS is the residual sum of squares from model fitting. For all hypotheses, the number of observations was n = 90. See Equation 2 and text for computation of ΔAICc. Hypotheses are arranged according to ΔAICc within each epoch. Hypotheses with ΔAIC = 0 were selected for parameter estimation.