MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The comparable size and overlapping nature of upper limb distal and proximal muscle representations in the human motor cortex

2006· article· en· W1990417966 on OpenAlexafffund
H. Devanne, F. Cassim, Christian Éthier, Laurent Brizzi, A. Thévenon, Charles Capaday

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationMotor cortexAnatomySupplementary motor areaPrimary motor cortexEvoked potentialDeltoid curveStimulationSMA*PhysicsMathematicsPsychologyNeuroscienceMedicineCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine the relative size and location of proximal and distal upper limb muscle representations in the human motor cortex. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation were recorded in the proximal muscle anterior deltoid (AD) and in the distal muscles extensor carpi radialis (ECR) and first dorsal interosseus (1DI). The coil was moved in steps of 1 cm along a grid drawn on a tight-fitting polyester cap placed on the subject's head. At each location, four stimuli were delivered at 1.2 times the active motor threshold (AMT), and MEPs averaged in real-time. The peak-to-peak amplitude of each muscle's mean MEP was measured at each stimulation site. The area of a muscle's representation was measured by a pixel-counting algorithm. The optimal point of each muscle's areal representation, which corresponds to the locus near which the largest MEPs are obtained, was determined by fitting a 3D Lorentzian function to the data points. The optimal point of distal muscles tended to be situated more laterally along the motor strip than that of proximal muscles. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the size of the areal representations and they overlapped considerably. Additionally, in another five subjects, using a small 45-mm coil placed in a hyper-focal orientation, maps were obtained at a stimulus intensity of 1.1-1.15 times the AMT of the muscle with the lowest threshold, usually the 1DI. Even in this very stringent condition, the mapped representations of the AD, ECR and 1DI overlapped, notwithstanding that sharp demarcations between borders were also apparent. These observations demonstrate that stimulus spread alone does not explain the overlap of muscle representations. These results show that commonly used proximal and distal upper-limb muscles, taken individually, are controlled by motor cortical territories of approximately equal size that significantly overlap despite differences in the location of their optimal points.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations89
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207