Cutaneous afferent innervation of the human foot sole: what can we learn from single-unit recordings?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cutaneous afferents convey exteroceptive information about the interaction of the body with the environment and proprioceptive information about body position and orientation. Four classes of low-threshold mechanoreceptor afferents innervate the foot sole and transmit feedback that facilitates the conscious and reflexive control of standing balance. Experimental manipulation of cutaneous feedback has been shown to alter the control of gait and standing balance. This has led to a growing interest in the design of intervention strategies that enhance cutaneous feedback and improve postural control. The advent of single-unit microneurography has allowed the firing and receptive field characteristics of foot sole cutaneous afferents to be investigated. In this review, we consolidate the available cutaneous afferent microneurographic recordings from the foot sole and provide an analysis of the firing threshold, and receptive field distribution and density of these cutaneous afferents. This work enhances the understanding of the foot sole as a sensory structure and provides a foundation for the continued development of sensory augmentation insoles and other tactile enhancement interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".