Table 3.

The proportion of explained variation (R²) achieved by the NMF algorithms at the ranks with minimum AIC

Algorithm	Behavior	Rank (N= 4; median ± SD)	R2 (N = 4; mean ± SD)
Gaussian	Intact Jump	3 ± 0.58	85.16 ± 4.08
	Deaff. Jump	2 ± 0.50	82.91 ± 3.52
	Intact Swim	1 ± 0.00	56.78 ± 4.89
	Deaff. Swim	1 ± 0.00	56.58 ± 12.33
$K{L}_G^H$	Intact Jump	2 ± 0.50	86.66 ± 3.64
	Deaff. Jump	2 ± 0.50	85.22 ± 1.09
	Intact Swim	2 ± 0.00	76.66 ± 3.68
	Deaff. Swim	2 ± 0.00	80.00 ± 5.07
$K{L}_G^{\mathit{MM}}$	Intact Jump	2 ± 0.50	86.66 ± 3.64
	Deaff. Jump	2 ± 0.50	85.22 ± 1.09
	Intact Swim	2 ± 0.00	76.66 ± 3.69
	Deaff. Swim	2 ± 0.00	80.00 ± 5.07
$K{L}_G^d$	Intact Jump	2 ± 0.50	98.21 ± 0.77
	Deaff. Jump	2 ± 0.50	98.05 ± 0.17
	Intact Swim	2 ± 0.50	92.81 ± 2.80
	Deaff. Swim	2 ± 0.50	94.78 ± 2.70
JG	Intact Jump	3 ± 0.50	98.05 ± 0.79
	Deaff. Jump	3 ± 0.50	97.61 ± 0.47
	Intact Swim	4 ± 0.50	93.03 ± 1.28
	Deaff. Swim	4 ± 0.50	95.18 ± 1.05
$K{L}_{\mathit{IG}}^H$	Intact Jump	10 ± 0.96	99.07 ± 0.38
	Deaff. Jump	11 ± 1.41	98.84 ± 0.54
	Intact Swim	11 ± 0.82	99.25 ± 0.34
	Deaff. Swim	12 ± 1.29	99.61 ± 0.30
$K{L}_{\mathit{IG}}^{\mathit{MM}}$	Intact Jump	9 ± 0.82	98.41 ± 0.45
	Deaff. Jump	10 ± 1.73	98.67 ± 0.49
	Intact Swim	11 ± 0.96	98.50 ± 0.46
	Deaff. Swim	10 ± 1.50	98.95 ± 0.43
$K{L}_{\mathit{IG}}^d$	Intact Jump	10 ± 1.50	99.98 ± 0.02
	Deaff. Jump	10 ± 1.41	99.98 ± 0.01
	Intact Swim	11 ± 0.58	99.92 ± 0.03
	Deaff. Swim	11 ± 1.41	99.97 ± 0.02