Central pattern generators in the brainstem and spinal cord: an overview of basic principles, similarities and differences
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
Central pattern generators (CPGs) are generally defined as networks of neurons capable of enabling the production of central commands, specifically controlling stereotyped, rhythmic motor behaviors. Several CPGs localized in brainstem and spinal cord areas have been shown to underlie the expression of complex behaviors such as deglutition, mastication, respiration, defecation, micturition, ejaculation, and locomotion. Their pivotal roles have clearly been demonstrated although their organization and cellular properties remain incompletely characterized. In recent years, insightful findings about CPGs have been made mainly because (1) several complementary animal models were developed; (2) these models enabled a wide variety of techniques to be used and, hence, a plethora of characteristics to be discovered; and (3) organizations, functions, and cell properties across all models and species studied thus far were generally found to be well-preserved phylogenetically. This article aims at providing an overview for non-experts of the most important findings made on CPGs in in vivo animal models, in vitro preparations from invertebrate and vertebrate species as well as in primates. Data about CPG functions, adaptation, organization, and cellular properties will be summarized with a special attention paid to the network for locomotion given its advanced level of characterization compared with some of the other CPGs. Similarities and differences between these networks will also be highlighted.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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