MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108005643 · doi:10.1115/1.4028818

Local Dynamic Stability of Spine Muscle Activation and Stiffness Patterns During Repetitive Lifting

2014· article· en· W2108005643 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan B. Graham, Stephen H.M. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsStiffnessTrunkControl theory (sociology)Muscle stiffnessMotor controlStability (learning theory)SPINE (molecular biology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceMathematicsPhysicsMedicineEngineeringControl (management)Structural engineeringBiologyNeuroscienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To facilitate stable trunk kinematics, humans must generate appropriate motor patterns to effectively control muscle force and stiffness and respond to biomechanical perturbations and/or neuromuscular control errors. Thus, it is important to understand physiological variables such as muscle force and stiffness, and how these relate to the downstream production of stable spine and trunk movements. This study was designed to assess the local dynamic stability of spine muscle activation and rotational stiffness patterns using Lyapunov analyses, and relationships to the local dynamic stability of resulting spine kinematics, during repetitive lifting and lowering at varying combinations of lifting load and rate. With an increase in the load lifted at a constant rate there was a trend for decreased local dynamic stability of spine muscle activations and the muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness; although the only significant change was for the full state space muscle activation stability (p < 0.05). With an increase in lifting rate with a constant load there was a significant decrease in the local dynamic stability of spine muscle activations and the muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (p ≤ 0.001 for all measures). These novel findings suggest that the stability of motor inputs and the muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness can be altered by external task demands (load and lifting rate), and therefore are important variables to consider when assessing the stability of the resulting kinematics.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207