The influence of tongue strength on oral viscosity discrimination acuity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to generate tongue pressures is widely considered to be critical for liquid bolus propulsion in swallowing. It has been proposed that the application of tongue pressure may also serve the function of collecting sensory information regarding bolus viscosity (resistance to flow). In this study, we explored the impact of age-related reductions in tongue strength on oral viscosity discrimination acuity. The experiment employed a triangle test discrimination protocol with an array of xanthan-gum thickened liquids in the mildly to moderately thick consistency range. A sample of 346 healthy volunteers was recruited, with age ranging from 12 to 86 (164 men, 182 women). On average, participants were able to detect a 0.29-fold increase in xanthan-gum concentration, corresponding to a 0.5-fold increase in viscosity at 50/s. Despite having significantly reduced tongue strength on maximum isometric tongue-palate pressure tasks, and regardless of sex, older participants in this study showed no reductions in viscosity discrimination acuity. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: In this article, the relationship between tongue strength and the ability to discriminate small differences in liquid viscosity during oral processing is explored. Given that tongue strength declines with age in healthy adults and is also reduced in individuals with dysphagia, it is interesting to determine whether reduced tongue strength might contribute to difficulties in evaluating liquid viscosity during the oral stage of swallowing. Using an array of mildly to moderately thick xanthan-gum thickened liquids, this experiment failed to find any evidence that reductions in tongue strength influence oral viscosity discrimination acuity.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 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 it