Elbow Flexor Inhibition as a Function of Muscle Length
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Muscle inhibition (MI) in human knee extensors increases with increasing maximal voluntary force as a function of knee angle. It was speculated that this angle-dependent MI was modulated by force-dependent feedback, likely Golgi tendon organ pathways. Such angle-dependent MI is of clinical and theoretical importance. The purpose of this study was to determine MI in human elbow flexors for maximal voluntary contractions. Muscle inhibition, elbow flexor force, and electromyographic (EMG) activity were measured in 31 volunteers at elbow angles between 30º and 120º. MI and elbow flexor EMG were the same at all elbow angles. Maximal isometric forces were greatest at the 70º angle, and never fell below 70% of the peak force at any of the tested angles. From these results it is concluded that force-dependent modulation of MI did not occur in the elbow flexors, possibly because maximal isometric force remained relatively close (within 30%) to the peak force. In contrast, force-dependent modulation of MI occurred in the knee extensors at the most extended angles, when the average knee extensor force had dropped to 50% or less of the maximal knee extensor force. It is likely that human maximal voluntary contractions are not associated with a given activation. Rather, activation appears to be modulated by force-dependent feedback at force levels below 70% of the absolute peak force, which manifests itself in a change of MI that parallels the level of maximal isometric force in voluntary contractions.
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".