MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2097178728 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2008.4650355

Effect of a visual-based sensory motor task on muscle tuning during a dynamic balance task

2008· article· en· W2097178728 on OpenAlexaff
Aimee L. Betker, Zahra Moussavi, Tony Szturm

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCursor (databases)Computer scienceCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)Tibialis anterior muscleComputer visionTrajectoryElectromyographyArtificial intelligenceSimulationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnatomyPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research, we explored visually-based sensory motor learning when a transformation was applied to the trajectory used to move and track a visual target in a virtual environment. The virtual task was controlled by the subject's center of foot pressure (COP), where the COP position was mapped to an on-screen cursor. Target balloons appeared randomly on the screen; the subject was instructed to move the COP-controlled cursor to intersect and burst the balloons. A transformation was applied to the movement trajectory, which rotated the on-screen cursor counter-clockwise by 60 degrees . The transformation required the subjects to update their spatial reference coordinates between the physical COP position and the on-screen cursor. To investigate learning during the transformation, electromyogram (EMG) data was recorded from the tibialis anterior and peroneus longus muscles. The muscle activity, calculated as the root mean square (RMS) of the EMG data, was calculated for each muscle as a function of the movement direction during movement initiation. The preferred direction (PD) for each muscle was then determined as the directional sum of the RMS values. The results showed a shift in the preferred direction (PD) of the muscles with learning.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMotor Control and Adaptation→French-language works237,207→