Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, animal studies employing electrical stimulation for conditioning denervated muscle rely on 24-hour-based stimulation paradigms, most employing implantable stimulators. While these stimulators provide the necessary current to cause muscular contraction, they have problems with battery life, programmability, and long-term robustness. Continuous 24-hour stimulation, while shown to be effective in animals, is not easily translatable to a clinical setting. It is also difficult to evaluate animal comfort and muscular contraction throughout a 24-hour period. We have developed a system and stimulation paradigm that can stimulate up to five animals at one time for one hour per day. The constant current stimulator is a USB-powered device that can, under computer control, output trains of pulses with selectable shapes, widths, durations and repetition rates. It is an external device with no implantable parts in the animal except for the stimulating electrodes. We tested the system on two groups of rats with denervated gastrocnemius muscles. One group was stimulated using a one-hour-per-day, 5-days-per-week stimulation paradigm for one month, while the other group had electrodes implanted but received no stimulation. Muscle weight and twitch force were significantly larger in the stimulated group than the non-stimulated group. Presently, we are using the stimulator to investigate electrical stimulation coupled with other therapeutic interventions that can minimize functional deficits after peripheral nerve injuries.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it