MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133413030 · doi:10.1123/mcj.8.2.160

Adaptations in Bilateral Mechanical Power Patterns during Obstacle Avoidance Reveal Distinct Control Strategies for Limb Elevation versus Limb Progression

2004· article· en· W2133413030 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMotor Control · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnklePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSwingLower limbMedicineKnee JointObstacle avoidanceUpper limbAnatomySurgeryComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated the adaptations of specific power bursts during the combined contexts of the proximity (lead vs. trail limb) and height of an obstruction in relation to limb elevation versus progression. Ten young, adult, male subjects walked at their natural speed during unobstructed walking and the bilateral avoidance of moderate and high obstacles. Hip flexor generation power was unaffected by obstacle height for the leading limb and always delayed for the trailing limb. The knee extensor absorption power burst at toe-off was also eliminated for the trailing limb and was found to reappear in mid-swing. Few differences were seen for ankle push-off power. The results suggest that the hip joint is dedicated to limb advancement only, while the knee joint is directly involved in limb elevation and the control of multiarticular effects.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.316 · 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