Dynamic cortical participation during bilateral, cyclical ankle movements: effects of aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The precise role of the human primary motor cortex in walking is unknown. Our previous study showed that the primary motor cortex may contribute to specific requirements of walking (i.e., maintaining a constant movement frequency and bilaterally coordinating the feet). Because aging can impair (i) the ability to fulfill the aforementioned requirements and (ii) corticomuscular communication, we hypothesized that aging would impair the motoneuronal recruitment by the primary motor cortex during bilateral cyclical movements. Here, we used corticomuscular coherence (i.e., coherence between the primary motor cortex and the active muscles) to examine whether corticomuscular communication is affected in older individuals during cyclical movements that shared some functional requirements with walking. Fifteen young men and 9 older men performed cyclical, anti-phasic dorsiflexion and plantarflexion of the feet while seated. Coherence between the midline primary motor cortex and contracting leg muscles cyclically increased in both age groups. However, the coherence of older participants was characterized by (i) lower magnitude and (ii) mediolaterally broader and more rostrally centered cortical distributions. These characteristics suggest that aging changes how the primary motor cortex participates in the cyclical movements, and such change may extend to walking.
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".