Primate Upper Limb Muscles Exhibit Activity Patterns That Differ From Their Anatomical Action During a Postural Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examined muscular activity in the primate proximal forelimb during a posture task. By applying loads selectively to the shoulder, elbow, or both joints, we observed that monoarticular shoulder and elbow muscles varied their activity with loads at the unspanned joint. Shoulder monoarticulars changed activity with elbow torque and elbow monoarticulars changed activity with shoulder torque. Due to this additional modulation, the maximal activation of monoarticular muscles was deviated from their anatomical action toward either shoulder-extension/elbow-flexion or shoulder-flexion/elbow-extension. Biarticular muscles also expressed deviations in their preferred torque direction toward either shoulder-extension/elbow-flexion or shoulder-flexion/elbow-extension. The biased distribution of preferred torque directions in proximal forelimb muscles could be modeled by the minimization of a global measure of muscle activity. Moreover, arm-related neurons of primary motor cortex exhibit a similar bias in preferred torque directions consistent with the intimate relationship between the primary motor cortex and the motor periphery.
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) | 0.001 | 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".