Disassociation between primary motor cortical activity and movement kinematics during adaptation to reach perturbations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between movement kinematics and motor cortical activity was studied in monkeys performing a center-out reaching task during their adaptation to force perturbations applied to the wrist. The main feature of adaptive changes in movement kinematics was anticipatory deviation of hand paths in the direction opposite to that of the upcoming perturbation. We identified a group of neurons in the dorsal lateral portion of the primary motor cortex where a gradual buildup of spike activity immediately preceding the actual (in perturbation trials) or the "would-be" (in unperturbed/catch trials) perturbation onset was observed. These neurons were actively involved in the adaptation process, which was evident from the gradual increase in the amplitude of their movement-related modulation of spike activity from virtual zero and development of certain directional tuning pattern (DTP). However, the day-to-day dynamics of the kinematics adaptation was dramatically different from that of the neuronal activity. Hence, the adaptive modification of the motor cortical activity is more likely to reflect the development of the internal model of the perturbation dynamics, rather than motor instructions determining the adaptive behavior.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".