MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967251271 · doi:10.1152/jn.00481.2013

Principal components of hand kinematics and neurophysiological signals in motor cortex during reach to grasp movements

2014· article· en· W1967251271 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mohsen Mollazadeh, Vikram Aggarwal, Nitish V. Thakor, Marc H. Schieber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsKinematicsMotor cortexNeurophysiologyPrincipal component analysisNeuroscienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceIsomapLocal field potentialMotor controlPremotor cortexGRASPPrimary motor cortexPattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyDimensionality reductionBiologyAnatomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A few kinematic synergies identified by principal component analysis (PCA) account for most of the variance in the coordinated joint rotations of the fingers and wrist used for a wide variety of hand movements. To examine the possibility that motor cortex might control the hand through such synergies, we collected simultaneous kinematic and neurophysiological data from monkeys performing a reach-to-grasp task. We used PCA, jPCA and isomap to extract kinematic synergies from 18 joint angles in the fingers and wrist and analyzed the relationships of both single-unit and multiunit spike recordings, as well as local field potentials (LFPs), to these synergies. For most spike recordings, the maximal absolute cross-correlations of firing rates were somewhat stronger with an individual joint angle than with any principal component (PC), any jPC or any isomap dimension. In decoding analyses, where spikes and LFP power in the 100- to 170-Hz band each provided better decoding than other LFP-based signals, the first PC was decoded as well as the best decoded joint angle. But the remaining PCs and jPCs were predicted with lower accuracy than individual joint angles. Although PCs, jPCs or isomap dimensions might provide a more parsimonious description of kinematics, our findings indicate that the kinematic synergies identified with these techniques are not represented in motor cortex more strongly than the original joint angles. We suggest that the motor cortex might act to sculpt the synergies generated by subcortical centers, superimposing an ability to individuate finger movements and adapt the hand to grasp a wide variety of objects.

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 score0.002
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207