Responses of human motoneurons to high‐frequency stimulation of Ia afferents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to extend to humans the findings of classical studies on anesthetized cats, which have examined the discharge of spinal motoneurons in response to high-frequency stimulus trains delivered to Ia afferents. Experiments were conducted on the monosynaptic pathway in the flexor carpi radialis (FCR) and soleus muscles. Subjects maintained a rhythmic discharge of a single motor unit (SMU) in either the FCR or soleus while homonymous Ia afferents were stimulated with either a single- or multipulse train. An n@IPI stimulus train had n pulses (n = 2-4) and an interpulse interval (IPI) of 1-8 ms. For each condition and motor unit, surface electromyographic (EMG) activity was averaged, and peristimulus-time histograms (PSTHs) were constructed for the SMU. The magnitude of the EMG was high for IPI = 1 ms, low for IPI = 2-3 ms, and high for IPI = 4-8 ms. SMU responses showed a similar pattern, which indicated that the increased EMG response was due to the presence of multiple peaks in a PSTH. The key results indicate that: (1) a short, high-frequency stimulus train enhances the discharge probability of a motoneuron above that observed with a single pulse; and (2) the increased motoneuron responses are significantly greater for the FCR than for the soleus muscle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".