Kinematics and Kinetics of Multijoint Reaching in Nonhuman Primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study identifies the mechanics of planar reaching movements performed by monkeys (Macaca mulatta) wearing a robotic exoskeleton. This device maintained the limb in the horizontal plane such that hand motion was generated only by flexor and extensor motions at the shoulder and elbow. The study describes the kinematic and kinetic features of the shoulder, elbow, and hand during reaching movements from a central target to peripheral targets located on the circumference of a circle: the center-out task. While subjects made reaching movements with relatively straight smooth hand paths and little variation in peak hand velocity, there were large variations in joint motion, torque, and power for movements in different spatial directions. Unlike single-joint movements, joint kinematics and kinetics were not tightly coupled for these multijoint movements. For most movements, power generation was predominantly generated at only one of the two joints. The present analysis illustrates the complexities inherent in multijoint movements and forms the basis for understanding strategies used by the motor system to control reaching movements and for interpreting the response of neurons in different brain regions during this task.
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".