MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987191140 · doi:10.1152/jn.00912.2009

A Contribution of Area 5 of the Posterior Parietal Cortex to the Planning of Visually Guided Locomotion: Limb-Specific and Limb-Independent Effects

2009· article· en· W1987191140 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacques‐Étienne Andujar, Kim Lajoie, Trevor Drew

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsForelimbPosterior parietal cortexNeuroscienceTreadmillGaitRhythmAnatomyProcess (computing)Cortex (anatomy)ObstaclePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyBiologyMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested the hypothesis that area 5 of the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) contributes to the planning of visually guided gait modifications. We recorded 121 neurons from the PPC of two cats during a task in which cats needed to process visual input to step over obstacles attached to a moving treadmill belt. During unobstructed locomotion, 64/121 (53%) of cells showed rhythmic activity. During steps over the obstacles, 102/121 (84%) of cells showed a significant change of their activity. Of these, 46/102 were unmodulated during the control task. We divided the 102 task-related cells into two groups on the basis of their discharge when the limb contralateral to the recording site was the first to pass over the obstacle. One group (41/102) was characterized by a brief, phasic discharge as the lead forelimb passed over the obstacle (Step-related cells). These cells were recorded primarily from area 5a. The other group (61/102) showed a progressive increase in activity prior to the onset of the swing phase in the modified limb and frequently diverged from control at least one step cycle before the gait modification (Step-advanced cells). Most of these cells were recorded in area 5b. In both groups, some cells maintained a fixed relationship to the activity of the contralateral forelimb regardless of which limb was the first to pass over the obstacle (limb-specific cells), whereas others changed their phase of activity so that they were always related to activity of the first limb to pass over the obstacle, either contralateral or ipsilateral (limb-independent cells). Limb-independent cells were more common among the Step-advanced cell population. We suggest that both populations of cells contribute to the gait modification and that the discharge characteristics of the Step-advanced cells are compatible with a contribution to the planning of the gait modification.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations63
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207