Phase dependent modulation of cortical activity during action observation and motor imagery of walking: An EEG study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) are motor simulations which induce cortical activity related to execution of observed and imagined movements. Neuroimaging studies have mainly investigated where the cortical activities during AO and MI of movements are activated and if they match those activated during execution of the movements. However, it remains unclear how cortical activity is modulated; in particular, whether activity depends on observed or imagined phases of movements. We have previously examined the neural mechanisms underlying AO and MI of walking, focusing on the combined effect of AO with MI (AO+MI) and phase dependent modulation of corticospinal and spinal reflex excitability. Here, as a continuation of our previous studies, we investigated cortical activity depending on gait phases during AO and AO+MI of walking by using electroencephalography (EEG); 64-channel EEG signals were recorded in which participants observed walking with or without imagining it, respectively. EEG source and spectral analyses showed that, in the sensorimotor cortex during AO+MI and AO, the alpha and beta power were decreased, and power spectral modulations depended on walking phases. The phase dependent modulations during AO+MI, but not during AO, were like those which occur during actual walking as reported by previous walking studies. These results suggest that combinatory effects of AO+MI could induce parts of the phase dependent activation of the sensorimotor cortex during walking even without any movements. These findings would extend understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying walking and cognitive motor processes and provide clinically beneficial information towards rehabilitation for patients with neurological gait dysfunctions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".