Extra Forces Evoked during Electrical Stimulation of the Muscle or Its Nerve Are Generated and Modulated by a Length-Dependent Intrinsic Property of Muscle in Humans and Cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extra forces or torques are defined as forces or torques that are larger than would be expected from the input or stimuli, which can be mediated by properties intrinsic to motoneurons and/or to the muscle. The purpose of this study was to determine whether extra forces/torques evoked during electrical stimulation of the muscle or its nerve with variable frequency stimulation are modulated by muscle length/joint angle. A secondary aim was to determine whether extra forces/torques are generated by an intrinsic neuronal or muscle property. Experiments were conducted in 14 able-bodied human subjects and in eight adult decerebrate cats. Torque and force were measured in human and cat experiments, respectively. Extra forces/torques were evoked by stimulating muscles with surface electrodes (human experiments) or by stimulating the nerve with cuff electrodes (cat experiments). In humans and cats, extra forces/torques were larger at short muscle lengths, indicating that a similar regulatory mechanism is involved. In decerebrate cats, extra forces and length-dependent modulation were unaffected by intrathecal methoxamine injections, despite evidence of increased spinal excitability, and by transecting the sciatic nerve proximal to the nerve stimulations. Anesthetic nerve block experiments in two human subjects also failed to abolish extra torques and the length-dependent modulation. Therefore, these data indicate that extra forces/torques evoked during electrical stimulation of the muscle or nerve are muscle length-dependent and primarily mediated by an intrinsic muscle property.
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".