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
Information regarding motor unit potentials (MUPs) and motor unit fi ring patterns during muscle contractions is useful for physiological investigation and clinical examinations either for the understanding of motor control or for the diagnosis of neuromuscular disorders. In order to obtain such information, composite electromyographic (EMG) signals are decomposed (i.e., resolved into their constituent motor unit potential trains [MUPTs]). The goals of automatic decomposition techniques are to create a MUPT for each motor unit that contributed significant MUPs to the original composite signal. Diagnosis can then be facilitated by decomposing a needle-detected EMG signal, extracting features of MUPTs, and finally analyzing the extracted features (i.e., quantitative electromyography). Herein, the concepts of EMG signals and EMG signal decomposition techniques are explained. The steps involved with the decomposition of an EMG signal and the methods developed for each step, along with their strengths and limitations, are discussed and compared. Finally, methods developed to evaluate decomposition algorithms and assess the validity of the obtained MUPTs are reviewed and evaluated.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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