Control of the triceps surae during the postural sway of quiet standing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The present study investigated how the triceps surae are controlled at the spinal level during the naturally occurring postural sway of quiet standing. METHODS: Subjects stood on a force platform as electrical stimuli were applied to the posterior tibial nerve when the center of pressure (COP) was either 1.6 standard deviations anterior (COP(ant)) or posterior (COP(post)) to the mean baseline COP signal. Peak-to-peak amplitudes of the H-reflex and M-wave from the soleus (SOL) and medial gastrocnemius (MG) muscles were recorded to assess the efficacy of the Ia pathway. RESULTS: A significant increase in the H(max) : M(max) ratio for both the SOL (12 +/- 6%) and MG (23 +/- 6%) was observed during the COP(ant) as compared to the COP(post) condition. The source of the modulation between COP conditions cannot be determined from this study. However, the observed changes in the synaptic efficacy of the Ia pathway are unlikely to be simply a result of an altered level of background electromyographic activity in the triceps surae. This was indicated by the lack of differences observed in the H(max) : M(max) ratio when subjects stood without postural sway (via the use of a tilt table) at two levels of background activity. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that the phase-dependent modulation of the triceps surae H-reflexes during the postural sway of quiet standing functions to maintain upright stance and may explain the results from previous studies, which, until now, had not taken the influence of postural sway on the H-reflex into consideration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".