MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1869104409 · doi:10.1109/mfi.1999.815992

Sensory motor control of wing beat in locust

2003· article· en· W1869104409 on OpenAlexaff
Simon X. Yang, Max Q.‐H. Meng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocustCentral pattern generatorSensory systemBeat (acoustics)ElevatorWingComputer scienceRhythmArtificial neural networkMotor controlNeurophysiologyNeuroscienceControl theory (sociology)BiologyEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)PhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a neural network architecture is proposed for sensory motor control of wing beat in a locust. The proposed neural network model is based on the neural anatomy and function of the neurons and sense organs involved in the flight control of wing beat in a locust. This model consists of a central pattern generator and a sensory motor network. Both the central nervous mechanisms and the sensory feedback are essential for the generation of the rhythmic output in the motoneuron. A larger input amplitude results in a higher frequency of the central pattern generator signal through a shorter down-strike duration. The feedback from sensory organs increase the wing beat frequency by generating an early, rapid increasing component and by modifying the late component of the elevator motoneuron activity. The model predictions are in qualitative agreement with the corresponding data.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207