MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152989183 · doi:10.1109/86.830944

Selective activation of muscle groups in the feline hindlimb through electrical microstimulation of the ventral lumbo-sacral spinal cord

2000· article· en· W2152989183 on OpenAlexaff
Vivian K. Mushahwar, K.W. Horch

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrostimulationHindlimbSpinal cordAnatomyStimulationMedicineSpinal cord injuryMotor neuronBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selective activation of muscle groups in the feline hindlimb by electrical stimulation of the ventral lumbo-sacral spinal cord was investigated. Spinal cord segments L5 to S1 were mapped using a penetrating tungsten needle electrode. Locations that produced isolated contraction of quadriceps, tibialis anterior or triceps surae/plantaris muscles when stimulated with a current of 40 microA or less, and in which spread of activity to other muscles was not detected after increasing the stimulus to at least twice the threshold level, were defined as belonging to the target muscle's "activation pool." The quadriceps activation pool was found to extend from the beginning of L5 to the middle of L6. The tibialis anterior activation pool extended from the beginning of L6 to the middle of L7, and the triceps surae/plantaris activation pool extended from the caudal end of L6 to the beginning of S1. The three activation pools were located in Rexed motor lamina IX and their spatial organization was found to correspond well with that of the anatomically defined motor pools innervating the same muscles. The spatial and functional segregation of motor pools manifested at the spinal cord level can have direct applications in the areas of functional electrical stimulation and motor 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations90
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207