Influence of ankle muscle fatigue on postural strategy selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nervous system (NS) combines sensory feedback, reflexes and descending central commands to generate effective postural control in changing environments. Although it is clear that neuromuscular fatigue alters sensory feedback, its impact on postural control is poorly understood. We investigated the effect of ankle neuromuscular fatigue on postural strategies used to control standing balance in conditions of support surface perturbations. We hypothesized that following ankle fatigue the NS will regulate the center of mass (COM) through a combination of ankle and hip strategies. Fifteen young healthy adults completed 10 pre- and 10 post-fatigue perturbations trials, each consisting of 1-minute sinusoidal anterior/posterior support surface oscillations with an unexpected postural perturbation generated by an increase in the oscillation frequency from 0.25 Hz to 0.5 Hz. Ankle plantar and dorsiflexors were fatigued to 50% of maximum contraction. Displacement of the hip, COM and temporal activation of the postural muscles were used to identify changes in postural control due to fatigue. Analysis demonstrated a post-fatigue shift from predominantly ankle-based control to a complex combination of ankle and hip muscle activity. The COM displacement was maintained while hip displacement increased significantly post-fatigue. The data suggest that post- ankle fatigue individuals ensure stability by shifting from isolated ankle control to one incorporating aspects of a hip strategy.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".