Detecting task-dependent modulation of spatiotemporal module via tensor decomposition: application to kinematics and EMG data for walking and running at various speed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How the central nervous system (CNS) controls many joints and muscles is a fundamental question in motor neuroscience and related research areas. An attractive hypothesis is the module hypothesis: the CNS controls groups of joints or muscles (i.e., spatial modules) while providing time-varying motor commands (i.e., temporal modules) to the spatial modules rather than controlling each joint or muscle separately. Another fundamental question is how the CNS generates numerous repertories of movement patterns. One hypothesis is that the CNS modulates the spatial and/or temporal modules depending on the required tasks. It is thus essential to quantify the spatial module, the temporal module, and the task-dependent modulation of those modules. Although previous methods attempted to quantify these aspects, they considered the modulation in only the spatial or temporal module. These limitations were possibly due to the constraints inherent to conventional methods for quantifying the spatial and temporal modules. Here, we demonstrate the effectiveness of tensor decomposition in quantifying the spatial module, the temporal module, and the task-dependent modulation of these modules without such limitations. We further demonstrate that the tensor decomposition provides a new perspective on the task-dependent modulation of spatiotemporal modules: in switching from walking to running, the CNS modulates the peak timing in the temporal module while recruiting proximal muscles in the corresponding spatial module. Author summary There are at least two fundamental questions in motor neuroscience and related research areas: 1) how does the central nervous system (CNS) control many joints and muscles and 2) how does the CNS generate numerous repertories of movement patterns. One possible answer to question 1) is that the CNS controls groups of joints or muscles (i.e., spatial modules) while providing time-varying motor commands (i.e., temporal modules) to the spatial modules rather than controlling each joint or muscle separately. One possible answer to question 2) is that the CNS modulates the spatial and/or temporal module depending on the required tasks. It is thus essential to quantify the spatial module, the temporal module, and the task-dependent modulation of those modules. Here, we demonstrate the effectiveness of tensor decomposition in quantifying the modules and those task-dependent modulations while overcoming the shortcomings inherent to previous methods. We further show that the tensor decomposition provides a new perspective on how the CNS switches between walking and running. The CNS modulated the peak timing in the temporal module while recruiting proximal muscles in the corresponding spatial module.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".