Central pattern generators in the brainstem and spinal cord: an overview of basic principles, similarities and differences
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".