MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790084005 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2018-0077

Modulation of motoneurone excitability during rhythmic motor outputs

2018· review· en· W2790084005 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Kevin E. Power, Evan J. Lockyer, Davis A. Forman, Duane C. Button

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
KeywordsNeuroscienceCentral pattern generatorRhythmSpinal cordCpG siteModulation (music)BiologyPsychologyMedicinePhysicsInternal medicineGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In quadrupeds, special circuity located within the spinal cord, referred to as central pattern generators (CPGs), is capable of producing complex patterns of activity such as locomotion in the absence of descending input. During these motor outputs, the electrical properties of spinal motoneurones are modulated such that the motoneurone is more easily activated. Indirect evidence suggests that like quadrupeds, humans also have spinally located CPGs capable of producing locomotor outputs, albeit descending input is considered to be of greater importance. Whether motoneurone properties are reconfigured in a similar manner to those of quadrupeds is unclear. The purpose of this review is to summarize our current state of knowledge regarding the modulation of motoneurone excitability during CPG-mediated motor outputs using animal models. This will be followed by more recent work initially aimed at understanding changes in motoneurone excitability during CPG-mediated motor outputs in humans, which quickly expanded to also include supraspinal excitability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207