Fig. 7. Coupling strength of rule 3 between contralateral legs. Likelihood of protraction in receiver legs of one side relative to time of lift-off (t_trans10) in sender legs of the other side. Same plot details as in Fig. 6. (Top) Outer legs are sender legs, inner legs are receiver legs; (bottom) inner legs are sender legs, outer legs are receiver legs. Peak likelihood was close to the expected baseline for the middle leg pair, indicating complete lack of contralateral coupling. In front and hind legs, coupling strength associated with rule 3 is much weaker than for ipsilateral leg pairs. During curve walking, the observed changes are in the same range as the shift of the baseline, indicating little or no context dependence.