MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620527430 · doi:10.1113/jp274309

Threshold position control of anticipation in humans: a possible role of corticospinal influences

2017· article· en· W2620527430 on OpenAlexafffund
Lei Zhang, Nicolas A. Turpin, Anatol G. Feldman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalJewish Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsWristTranscranial magnetic stimulationAnticipation (artificial intelligence)Physical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceMotor cortexPrimary motor cortexPsychologyMotor programElectromyographyMedicineAnatomyStimulationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: Sudden unloading of preloaded wrist muscles elicits motion to a new wrist position. Such motion is prevented if subjects unload muscles using the contralateral arm (self-unloading). Corticospinal influences originated from the primary motor cortex maintain tonic influences on motoneurons of wrist muscles before sudden unloading but modify these influences prior to the onset and until the end of self-unloading. Results are interpreted based on the previous finding that intentional actions are caused by central, particularly corticospinal, shifts in the spatial thresholds at which wrist motoneurons are activated, thus predetermining the attractor point at which the neuromuscular periphery achieves mechanical balance with environment forces. By maintaining or shifting the thresholds, descending systems let body segments go to the equilibrium position in the respective unloading tasks without the pre-programming of kinematics or muscle activation patterns. The study advances the understanding of how motor actions in general, and anticipation in particular, are controlled. ABSTRACT: The role of corticospinal (CS) pathways in anticipatory motor actions was evaluated using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the primary motor cortex projecting to motoneurons (MNs) of wrist muscles. Preloaded wrist flexors were suddenly unloaded by the experimenter or by the subject using the other hand (self-unloading). After sudden unloading, the wrist joint involuntarily flexed to a new position. In contrast, during self-unloading the wrist remained almost motionless, implying that an anticipatory postural adjustment occurred. In the self-unloading task, anticipation was manifested by a decrease in descending facilitation of pre-activated flexor MNs starting ∼72 ms before changes in the background EMG activity. Descending facilitation of extensor MNs began to increase ∼61 ms later. Conversely, these influences remained unchanged before sudden unloading, implying the absence of anticipation. We also tested TMS responses during EMG silent periods produced by brief muscle shortening, transiently resulting in similar EMG levels before the onset and after the end of self-unloading. We found reduced descending facilitation of flexor MNs after self-unloading. To explain why the wrist excursion was minimized in self-unloading due to these changes in descending influences, we relied on previous demonstrations that descending systems pre-set the threshold positions of body segments at which muscles begin to be activated, thus predetermining the equilibrium point to which the system is attracted. Based on this notion, a more consistent explanation of the kinematic, EMG and descending patterns in the two types of unloading is proposed compared to the alternative notion of direct pre-programming of kinematic and/or EMG patterns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207