Stumbling Corrective Responses During Treadmill‐Elicited Stepping in Human Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined stumbling corrective (tripping) responses to mechanical disturbances applied to the foot during stepping in healthy human infants, in whom independent walking had not yet developed. During treadmill-elicited stepping, a foam-padded baton instrumented with a force transducer was used to deliver light touches to either the dorsum or the side of the foot at various times of the step cycle. Disturbances to the dorsum of the foot during the swing phase resulted in a general enhancement of flexor activity, including a significant facilitation in the tibialis anterior muscle and an increase in knee flexion during swing. There was also an increase in step cycle duration. Stance phase disturbances resulted in a significant inhibitory effect in the quadriceps muscle and after early stance disturbances, a significant prolongation of the stance phase duration. Disturbances applied to the side of the foot during the swing phase of forward stepping did not result in any effect on the kinematic pattern. If the infant was stepping sideways, however, disturbances to the side of the foot resulted in an increase in flexion during the swing phase. The results show that infants have a phase-dependent reflex response to light touches applied to the foot. Furthermore, the reflex response is location specific and task specific. Thus, much of the sophistication necessary for controlling sensory inputs in walking is present well before the onset of independent walking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".