MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stimulation of the Posterior Parietal Cortex Interferes with Arm Trajectory Adjustments during the Learning of New Dynamics

2004· article· en· W2013885032 on OpenAlexafffund
Valeria Della‐Maggiore, Nicole Malfait, David J. Ostry, Tomáš Paus

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationPosterior parietal cortexContext (archaeology)Motor learningNeurosciencePsychologySensorimotor cortexTrajectoryCortex (anatomy)Adaptation (eye)StimulationNeurophysiologyMotor cortexComputer sciencePhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Substantial neurophysiological evidence points to the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) as playing a key role in the coordinate transformation necessary for visually guided reaching. Our goal was to examine the role of PPC in the context of learning new dynamics of arm movements. We assessed this possibility by stimulating PPC with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) while subjects learned to make reaching movements with their right hand in a velocity-dependent force field. We reasoned that, if PPC is necessary to adjust the trajectory of the arm as it interacts with a novel mechanical system, interfering with the functioning of PPC would impair adaptation. Single pulses of TMS were applied over the left PPC 40 msec after the onset of movement during adaptation. As a control, another group of subjects was stimulated over the visual cortex. During early stages of learning, the magnitude of the error (measured as the deviation of the hand paths) was similar across groups. By the end of the learning period, however, error magnitudes decreased to baseline levels for controls but remained significantly larger for the group stimulated over PPC. Our findings are consistent with a role of PPC in the adjustment of motor commands necessary for adapting to a novel mechanical environment.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations179
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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