RHY.14:5 - Archetypal Grounding

These cases use constructed observations. They demonstrate interpretation and calculation, not field findings.

RHY.14:5.1 - A smaller average hides an unmatched attack

The intended passage has five attacks at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 and 2 seconds, with no additional attacks. The local task accepts a deviation up to 0.10 seconds for event matching. It requires all five attacks.

Recording A contains attacks at 0.02, 0.52, 1.20, 1.52 and 2.02. Inspection confirms that these are performed attacks rather than detector echoes. The matching rule pairs four events, each 0.02 seconds late; the intended location at 1 has no match within its window, and the attack at 1.20 lies outside all admitted windows. The recording still contains five attacks; the two unmatched entries describe this rule’s failed correspondence, not proof that two separate physical errors occurred.

Recording B has five matched deviations: −0.04, 0.03, −0.02, 0.04 and −0.01 seconds. Its mean absolute deviation is 0.028 seconds. A’s matched-event mean is smaller, 0.02, but A does not satisfy the required event sequence under the stated rule.

The useful comparison retains B for the complete passage and directs A’s next repair to the misplaced attack. It does not select A by silently discarding its unmatched events or mispair its late attack with the next beat. If the task instead allowed that displacement as an ornament, the matching and success conditions would have to change.

An ambiguous correspondence. In a different two-attack fragment, the expected times are 0 and 0.12 seconds and the allowed deviation is 0.10 seconds. The recording contains one confirmed attack at 0.06 seconds. It can match either expected attack, but cannot satisfy both. The complete-fragment requirement already fails; the missing attack’s identity remains unresolved. A decision to repeat the whole fragment needs no further observation. If the correction depends on which action was omitted, inspect an identifiable sound or action in the existing recording. If it supplies no distinction, retain that uncertainty rather than assigning the nearest event by convention.

RHY.14:5.2 - Sampled peaks do not show continued support

Two recorded movement variants have the same initial position, peak at the accent and final position. The receiving task needs a continuing sweep through the accent.

The short video includes the intervening motion. It shows A continuing the sweep through its articulation; B stops, accents, then restarts. A comparison using only the three equal landmarks would have lost that difference.

For the intended visible-continuation question, A is the useful local variant. If the partner instead reports a loss of contact pressure despite the visible continuation, the video alone does not settle that complaint. Obtain a suitable contact observation or an agreed partner-response contrast. The first comparison remains valid for visible motion.

RHY.14:5.3 - A listener’s preference does not yet show movement

A listener compares two passages on the same five-position response scales. In the stipulated responses, A receives 5 for wanting to move and 3 for pleasure; B receives 2 and 5 respectively. The listener remained seated, and no movement observation was made.

For selecting a candidate to try in a voluntary movement session, A has the stronger relevant reported response from this listener. For a listening session prioritizing reported pleasure, B has the stronger response. Neither result establishes that A elicits coordinated movement or that either choice works for another population.

The next movement session can use A as a bounded choice without claiming an established motor effect. If coordinated participation is the unresolved decision, observe that action in the session instead of renaming the desire rating as performance.

RHY.14:5.4 - Equal endings leave internal coordination open

Two ensemble versions begin and end together. In A, a marked middle entry is also coordinated; in B, one player’s entry comes after the others have passed the receiving cue. The recording preserves that middle passage.

The endpoint measure ties the versions, but the entry observation does not. Retain A for a task requiring that coordinated entry and use RHY.9 or RHY.10 to repair B’s cue or adjustment. The result needs neither a whole-piece average nor an assertion that every other internal relation was inspected.