MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048690171 · doi:10.1152/jn.01028.2009

Effects of Ankle and Hip Muscle Afferent Inputs on Rhythm Generation During Fictive Locomotion

2010· article· en· W2048690171 on OpenAlexafffund
Alain Frigon, Jennifer Sirois, Jean‐Pierre Gossard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRhythmAnkleStimulationCentral pattern generatorAnkle dorsiflexionDuration (music)TrunkAnatomyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceMedicinePsychologyBiologyInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hip position and loading of limb extensors are major sensory cues for the initiation and duration of different phases during walking. Although these inputs have pathways projecting to the locomotor rhythm generator, their effects may vary in different parts of the locomotor cycle. In the present study, the plantaris (Pl), sartorius (Sart), rectus femoris (RF), and caudal gluteal (cGlu) nerves were stimulated at group I and/or group II strength during spontaneous fictive locomotion in 16 adult decerebrate cats. These nerves supply muscles that extend the ankle (Pl), flex the hip (Sart, RF), or extend the hip (cGlu). Stimuli were given at six epochs of the locomotor cycle to evaluate when they access the rhythm generator. Group I afferents from Pl nerve always reset the locomotor rhythm; stimulation during extension prolonged cycle period and extension phase duration, while stimulation during flexion terminated flexion and initiated extension. On the other hand, stimulating RF and cGlu nerves only produced significant effects on the rhythm in precise epochs, particularly during mid-flexion and/or mid- to late extension. Stimulating the Sart nerve produced complex effects on the rhythm that were not distributed evenly to all extensor motor pools. The most consistent effect was reduced flexion phase duration with stimulation during flexion, particularly at group II strength, and prolongation of the extension phase but only in late extension. That hip muscle afferents reset the rhythm in only specific epochs of the locomotor cycle suggests that the rhythm generator operates with several subdivisions to determine phase and cycle durations.

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 score0.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207