MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043144740 · doi:10.1002/mus.21447

Voluntary activation in the triceps brachii at short and long muscle lengths

2009· article· en· W2043144740 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur J. Cheng, Charles L. Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnoverExtrapolationElbow flexionAmplitudeElbowPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMuscle contractionContraction (grammar)ElectromyographyPhysicsCardiologyAnatomyMedicinePhysical therapyInternal medicineMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim was of this study was to determine whether voluntary activation calculated using the interpolated twitch technique (ITT) would be underestimated by muscle length-induced changes in the twitch amplitude evoked at rest after maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) in the elbow extensors. In 12 healthy men, calculated voluntary activations were compared at short (20 degrees of elbow flexion) and long muscle lengths (120 degrees ) using the actual post-MVC doublet, and the predicted post-MVC doublet estimated from linear or nonlinear extrapolations. Actual post-MVC doublet amplitudes were smaller at 20 degrees versus 120 degrees . At 20 degrees , the predicted post-MVC doublet obtained from nonlinear extrapolation was larger, and voluntary activation values improved by 5-33% at the submaximal voluntary contraction intensities (< or =80% of MVC). When voluntary drive is compromised, this method of extrapolation is useful to account for mechanical limitations that blunt the actual post-MVC doublet, which otherwise leads to underestimation of voluntary activation.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207