Muscle synergies during locomotion in the cat: a model for motor cortex control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that the motor cortex makes an important contribution to the control of visually guided gait modifications, such as those required to step over an obstacle. However, it is less clear how the descending cortical signal interacts with the interneuronal networks in the spinal cord to ensure that precise changes in limb trajectory are appropriately incorporated into the base locomotor rhythm. Here we suggest that subpopulations of motor cortical neurones, active sequentially during the step cycle, may regulate the activity of small groups of synergistic muscles, likewise active sequentially throughout the step cycle. These synergies, identified by a novel associative cluster analysis, are defined by periods of muscle activity that are coextensive with respect to the onset and offset of the EMG activity. Moreover, the synergies are sparse and are frequently composed of muscles acting around more than one joint. During gait modifications, we suggest that subpopulations of motor cortical neurones may modify the magnitude and phase of the EMG activity of all muscles contained within a given synergy. Different limb trajectories would be produced by differentially modifying the activity in each synergy thus providing a flexible substrate for the control of intralimb coordination during locomotion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".