MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118874222 · doi:10.1152/jn.00511.2013

Localizing evoked cortical activity associated with balance reactions: does the anterior cingulate play a role?

2014· article· en· W2118874222 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Marlin, George Mochizuki, William E. McIlroy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke FoundationSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceBalance (ability)PsychologyAnterior cingulate cortexCingulate cortexCognitive psychologyCognitionCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to correct balance disturbances is essential for the maintenance of upright stability. Although information about how the central nervous system controls balance reactions in humans remains limited, recent literature highlights a potentially important role for the cerebral cortex. The objective of this study was to determine the neural source of the well-reported balance-evoked N1 response. It was hypothesized that the N1 is associated with an "error-detection" event in response to the induced perturbation and therefore may be associated with activity within the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). The localized source of the N1 evoked by perturbations to standing balance was compared, within each participant, to the location of an error-related negativity (ERN) known to occur within the ACC while performing a flanker task. In contrast to the main hypotheses, the results revealed that the location of the N1 was not within the ACC. The mean Talairach coordinates for the ERN were (6.47, -4.41, 41.17) mm, corresponding to the cingulate gyrus [Brodmann area (BA) 24], as expected. However, coordinates for the N1 dipole were (5.74, -11.81, 53.73) mm, corresponding to the medial frontal gyrus (BA 6), specifically the supplementary motor area. This may suggest the N1 is linked to the planning and execution of elements of the evoked balance reactions rather than being associated with error or event detection. Alternatively, it is possible that the N1 is associated with variation in the cortical representation due to task-specific differences in the activation of a distributed network of error-related processing. Subsequent work should focus on disentangling these two possible explanations as they relate to the cortical processing linked to reactive balance control.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations107
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207