MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079648184 · doi:10.1002/mus.10242

Motion of the foot and ankle during the stance phase in rats

2002· article· en· W2079648184 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEuropean Social Fund
KeywordsAnkleKinematicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGaitFoot (prosody)Gait analysisComputer scienceGround reaction forceBiomechanicsMedicineAnatomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computerized analysis of rat gait is becoming an invaluable technique used by some peripheral nerve investigators for the evaluation of function. In this article we describe the use of a biomechanical model of the foot and ankle that allows a quantitative assessment and description of the ankle angle, reflecting plantarflexion and dorsiflexion during the stance phase of gait. Kinematic data of 144 trial walks from 36 normal rats were recorded with a high-speed digital image camera at 225 images per second. The ankle angular changes associated with the specific temporal events of foot placement on the ground through the stance phase were assessed. The information obtained was used to propose a new subdivision of the stance phase in the rat into three major components. This approach will provide a helpful research tool to analyze gait data that rely on the accurate determination of spatiotemporal foot events.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.284 · 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