MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885073002 · doi:10.1097/wnr.0000000000001117

Functional interaction between human dorsal premotor cortex and the ipsilateral primary motor cortex for grasp plans

2018· article· en· W2885073002 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Vesia, Jody C. Culham, Gaayathiri Jegatheeswaran, Reina Isayama, Ada Le, Marco Davare, Robert Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkWestern University
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationNeurosciencePrimary motor cortexGRASPMotor cortexPremotor cortexHand strengthStimulationDorsumHand musclesSensorimotor cortexMotor areaPsychologyAnatomyMedicineComputer scienceGrip strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent findings suggest that the dorsal premotor cortex (PMd), a cortical area in the dorsomedial pathway, is involved in grasp control. It is unclear, however, whether human PMd transfers grasp-related information to the primary motor cortex hand area (M1HAND) during action preparation. The present study tested whether ipsilateral cortico-cortical connections between PMd and M1HAND in the left hemisphere are modulated during grasp preparation. Ten participants performed object-directed grasps and reaches with the right hand. Functional connectivity between left PMd and ipsilateral M1HAND was probed with dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation. We found that PMd-M1HAND functional interactions were facilitated selectively for the muscles involved in the preparation of the upcoming grasps. The PMd-M1HAND interaction was facilitated for first dorsal interosseous muscle for both precision grip and whole-hand grasps and for abductor digiti minimi muscle for whole-hand grasps. We conclude that human dorsomedial PMd-M1HAND circuit encodes handgrip formation during grasp preparation.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207