Current Understanding of Residual Force Enhancement: Cross-Bridge Component and Non-Cross-Bridge Component
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Muscle contraction is initiated by the interaction between actin and myosin filaments. The sliding of actin filaments relative to myosin filaments is produced by cross-bridge cycling, which is governed by the theoretical framework of the cross-bridge theory. The cross-bridge theory explains well a number of mechanical responses, such as isometric and concentric contractions. However, some experimental observations cannot be explained with the cross-bridge theory; for example, the increased isometric force after eccentric contractions. The steady-state, isometric force after an eccentric contraction is greater than that attained in a purely isometric contraction at the same muscle length and same activation level. This well-acknowledged and universally observed property is referred to as residual force enhancement (rFE). Since rFE cannot be explained by the cross-bridge theory, alternative mechanisms for explaining this force response have been proposed. In this review, we introduce the basic concepts of sarcomere length non-uniformity and titin elasticity, which are the primary candidates that have been used for explaining rFE, and discuss unresolved problems regarding these mechanisms, and how to proceed with future experiments in this exciting area of research.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".