MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1480599195 · doi:10.1109/iconip.2002.1202796

Predicting the timing of motor commands in a synchronization task: a PET study

2004· article· en· W1480599195 on OpenAlexaff
Chantal Bard, J. Blouin, Jacques Paillard, Julien Doyon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPremotor cortexNeuroscienceCerebellumMotor cortexSupplementary motor areaDorsolateral prefrontal cortexPrefrontal cortexPsychologyMotor controlPositron emission tomographyDorsumMedicineAnatomyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used positron emission tomography to examine the neural substrate underlying self-initiated (SI) versus externally triggered (ET) synchronized movements. Seven healthy subjects performed synchronized right hand and foot movements in SI and ET conditions. Behaviourally, subjects exhibited a precession of finger initiation over foot dorsi-flexion in the ET condition, and precession of foot over finger onset in the SI condition. When compared to ET movements, the preparation of SI synchronized movements showed activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, pre-supplementary motor area and lateral premotor cortex. These cortical regions were thought to be associated to the internal movement triggering for the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and to the motor preparation for both pre-supplementary motor area and dorsal premotor cortex. Our main finding was a prominent activation of the left posterolateral hemi-cerebellum in the SI condition when compared to the ET condition. These results provide anatomical data supporting the timing and predictive roles of the cerebellum in motor control.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMotor Control and Adaptation→French-language works237,207→