Time Course and Magnitude of Movement-Related Gating of Tactile Detection in Humans. II. Effects of Stimulus Intensity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effect of systematically varying stimulus intensity on the time course and magnitude of movement-related gating of tactile detection and scaling in 17 human subjects trained to perform a rapid abduction of the right index finger (D2) in response to a visual cue. Electrical stimulation was delivered to D2 at five different intensities. At the lowest intensity, approximately 90% of stimuli were detected at rest (1 x P(90)); four multiples of this intensity were also tested (1.25, 1.5, 1.75, and 2. 0 x P(90)). At all intensities of stimulation, detection of stimuli applied to the moving digit was diminished significantly and in a time-dependent manner, with peak decreases occurring within +/-12 ms of the onset of electromyographic activity in the first dorsal interosseous (25-45 ms before movement onset). Reductions in the proportion of stimuli detected were greatest at the lowest stimulus intensity and progressively smaller at higher intensities. No shift in the timing of the decreases in performance was seen with increasing intensity. Once the weakest intensity at which most stimuli were perceived during movement had been established (2 x P(90)), magnitude estimation experiments were performed using two stimulus intensities, 2 x P(90) (5 subjects) and 3 x P(90) (3 subjects). Significant movement-related decreases in estimated stimulus magnitude were observed at both intensities, the time course of which was similar to the time course of reductions in detection performance. As stimulus intensity increased, the magnitude of the movement-related decrease in scaling diminished. A model of detection performance that accurately described the effect of stimulus intensity and timing on movement-related reductions in detection was created. This model was then combined with a previous model that described the effects of stimulus localization and timing to predict detection performance at a given stimulation site, intensity, and time during movement. Movement-related gating of tactile perception represents the end result of movement-related effects on the transmission and subsequent processing of the stimulus. The combined model clearly defines many of the requirements that proposed physiological mechanisms of movement-related gating will have to fulfill.
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".