A speed-adaptive intraspinal microstimulation controller to restore weight-bearing stepping in a spinal cord hemisection model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to develop control strategies to produce alternating, weight-bearing stepping in a cat model of hemisection spinal cord injury (SCI) using intraspinal microstimulation (ISMS). APPROACH: Six cats were anesthetized and the functional consequences of a hemisection SCI were simulated by manually moving one hind-limb through the gait cycle over a moving treadmill belt. ISMS activated the muscles in the other leg by stimulating motor networks in the lumbosacral enlargement using low levels of current (<110 µA). The control strategy used signals from ground reaction forces and angular velocity from the manually-moved limb to anticipate states of the gait cycle, and controlled ISMS to move the other hind-limb into the opposite state. Adaptive control strategies were developed to ensure weight-bearing at different stepping speeds. The step period was predicted using generalizations obtained through four supervised machine learning algorithms and used to adapt the control strategy for faster steps. MAIN RESULTS: At a single speed, 100% of the steps had sufficient weight-bearing; at faster speeds without adaptation, 97.6% of steps were weight-bearing (significantly less than that for single speed; p = 0.002). By adapting the control strategy for faster steps using the predicted step period, weight-bearing was achieved in more than 99% of the steps in three of four methods (significantly more than without adaptation p < 0.04). Overall, a multivariate model tree increased the number of weight-bearing steps, restored step symmetry, and maintained alternation at faster stepping speeds. SIGNIFICANCE: Through the adaptive control strategies guided by supervised machine learning, we were able to restore weight-bearing and maintain alternation and step symmetry at varying stepping speeds.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".