In the current implication, it seems I forgot the marginalization over the exact time-point of midline crossing in the contralateral state evolution again. I simply weigh the contralateral state dist evolution where midext was never present and the one where it was always present with the evolution over midline extension. This is WRONG!
In the current implication, it seems I forgot the marginalization over the exact time-point of midline crossing in the contralateral state evolution again. I simply weigh the contralateral state dist evolution where midext was never present and the one where it was always present with the evolution over midline extension. This is WRONG!