Sequential Activation of Muscle Synergies During Locomotion in the Intact Cat as Revealed by Cluster Analysis and Direct Decomposition
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
During goal-directed locomotion, descending signals from supraspinal structures act through spinal interneuron pathways to effect modifications of muscle activity that are appropriate to the task requirements. Recent studies using decomposition methods suggest that this control might be facilitated by activating synergies organized at the level of the spinal cord. However, it is difficult to directly relate these mathematically defined synergies to the patterns of electromyographic activity observed in the original recordings. To address this issue, we have used a novel cluster analysis to make a detailed study of the organization of the synergistic patterns of muscle activity observed in the fore- and hindlimb during treadmill locomotion. The results show that the activity of a large number of forelimb muscles (26 bursts of activity from 18 muscles) can be grouped into 11 clusters on the basis of synchronous co-activation. Nine (9/11) of these clusters defined muscle activity during the swing phase of locomotion; these clusters were distributed in a sequential manner and were related to discrete behavioral events. A comparison with the synergies identified by linear decomposition methods showed some striking similarities between the synergies identified by the different methods. In the hindlimb, a simpler organization was observed, and a sequential activation of muscles similar to that observed in the forelimb during swing was less clear. We suggest that this organization of synergistic muscles provides a means by which descending signals could provide the detailed control of different muscle groups that is necessary for the flexible control of multi-articular movements.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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