Table 3.

Results and quality measures for BM and MM.

S#	M	N	p0	τa, τp	τf, τn	ka, κp	kf, κn	γ	δ	r2	r2Adj	Cp	PCI
1	BM	38	94.2	45	17	0.01	0.03			0.42	0.32	4.12	16
	MM	38	94.2	56	7	0.04	0.08	6	0.1	0.48	0.36	3.74	18
2	BM	57	95.4	40	10	0.03	0.08			0.30	0.24	1.52	22
	MM	57	94.2	24	23	0.78	0.74	1	10	0.32	0.21	1.60	29
3	BM	62	96.2	56	14	0.01	0.03			0.47	0.45	2.33	18
	MM	62	97.1	37	30	0.43	0.67	6.9	0.4	0.54	0.48	2.28	24
4	BM	41	97.3	45	28	0.01	0.02			0.39	0.32	3.24	21
	MM	41	99.1	39	21	0.22	0.42	0.1	1.2	0.57	0.48	2.76	31
5	BM	51	93.3	55	14	0.02	0.09			0.52	0.48	1.69	17
	MM	51	95.4	54	14	0.06	0.24	1.2	1.6	0.58	0.51	1.66	31
6	BM	52	90.3	45	18	0.01	0.06			0.53	0.49	1.92	24
	MM	52	89.1	40	18	0.43	0.67	0.9	4.3	0.57	0.51	2.02	24
7	BM	41	91.5	61	33	0.01	0.07			0.34	0.23	1.93	23
	MM	41	90.1	56	11	0.44	0.11	0.4	5.1	0.55	0.44	1.91	23
M	BM	48.7	94.0	49.6	19.1	0.01	0.05			0.42	0.36	2.39	20.1
SD		9.1	2.5	7.7	8.3	0.01	0.03			0.1	0.1	0.95	3.1
M	MM	48.7	94.2	43.7	17.7	0.34	0.42	2.36	3.24	0.52	0.43	2.28	25.7
SD		9.1	3.6	12.1	7.8	0.26	0.28	2.83	3.54	0.1	0.1	0.75	4.8

S#, subject number; M model; BM, Banister model; MM, modified model; N, number of performances; p₀ basic performance level; τ_a, τ_p, decay time constant for the positive performance component for the BM and MM, respectively (days); τ_f, τ_n, decay time constant for the negative performance component for the BM and MM, respectively (days); k_a, k_f, multiplying factors for the positive and negative component of training, respectively (a.u.); κ_p, κ_n, saturation threshold values for the positive and negative component of training, respectively (a.u.); γ time to reach threshold (a.u.); δ, sensitivity to training load (a.u.); r² coefficient of determination; r²_Adj adjusted coefficient of determination (the relationships between training and performance were significant (P <0.01) for the two models in all subjects); C_p, Mallow’s C_p score. PCI, number of actual performances included in the 95% CI of the estimated performances.