Double representation of the wrist and elbow in human motor cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Movements of the fingers, hand and arm involve overlapping neural representations in primary motor cortex (M1). Monkey M1 exhibits a core-surround organisation in which cortical representation of the hand and fingers is surrounded by representations of the wrist, elbow and shoulder. A potentially homologous organisation in human M1 has only been observed in a single study, a functional MRI (fMRI) study by [J.D. Meier, T.N. Aflalo, S. Kastner & M.S. Graziano.(2008) J Neurophysiol, 100(4), 1800-1812]. The results of their study suggested a double representation of the wrist in human M1, an unprecedented finding. Our purpose was to document and simultaneously provide evidence that would extend the presence of double representation of the wrist to that of the elbow. Using fMRI, we observed somatotopic maps in M1 and the supplementary motor area (SMA), the only other cortical area that showed robust within-limb somatotopy during self-timed finger, wrist and elbow movements. We observed double wrist and elbow representation that bracketed finger fMRI responses in M1 and the SMA. Our results show that the cortical locations of these double representations are well predicted by local cortical anatomy. Double representation of the wrist and elbow is important because it violates the traditional somatotopic progression in M1 but it is consistent with the representation of synergistic movements involving adjacent effectors.
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 | 0.001 | 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".