Sensory information from a slipping object elicits a rapid and automatic shoulder response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Humans have the remarkable ability to hold, grasp, and manipulate objects. Previous work has reported rapid and coordinated reactions in hand and shoulder muscles in response to external perturbations to the arm during object manipulation; however, little is known about how somatosensory feedback of an object slipping in the hand influences responses of the arm. We built a hand-held device to stimulate the sensation of slipping at all five fingertips. The device was integrated into an exoskeleton robot that supported it against gravity. The setup allowed us to decouple somatosensory stimulation in the fingers from forces applied to the arm— two variables that are highly interdependent in real-world scenarios. Fourteen participants performed three experiments in which we measured their arm feedback responses during slip stimulation. Slip stimulations were applied horizontally, in one of two directions, and participants were either instructed to follow the slip direction, or to move the arm in the opposite direction. Participants showed responses within ∼67 ms of slip onset when following the direction of slip, but significantly slower responses when instructed to move in the opposite direction. Arm responses were modulated by the speed but not the distance of the slip. Finally, when slip stimulation was combined with mechanical perturbations to the arm, we found that sensory information from the fingertips significantly modulated the shoulder feedback response. Overall, the results demonstrate the existence of a rapid feedback system that stabilizes hand-held objects. NEW & NOTHEWORTHY We tested whether the sensation of an object slipping from the fingers modulates shoulder feedback responses. We found rapid shoulder feedback responses when participants were instructed to follow the slip direction with the arm. Shoulder responses following mechanical joint perturbations were also potentiated when combined with slipping. These results demonstrate the existence of fast and automatic feedback responses in the arm in reaction to sensory input to the fingertips that maintain grip on hand-held objects.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".