Is the ‘reverse onion skin’ phenomenon more prevalent than we thought during intramuscular myoelectric recordings from low to maximal force outputs?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are isolated instances in the literature that suggest the ‘onion skin’ phenomenon is not always present. That is, newly recruited high threshold motor units (MU) have higher discharge rates than previously recruited low threshold MUs. Therefore, the purpose of this paper was to investigate the presence of the ‘onion skin’ phenomenon in a large sample of intramuscular myoelectric recordings from low to maximal force outputs. Forty-eight participants performed rapid isometric dorsiflexion contractions at 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100 % MVC while intramuscular electrical activity was recorded. A bivariate frequency-distribution of the motor unit discharge rate and motor unit action potential peak-to-peak (P-P) amplitude was assessed. There was a significant difference in bivariate frequency-distribution across force levels (D’s = 0.1083−0.3094, p’s < 0.001). Newly recruited high threshold MUs did have lower discharge rates, but there was an increase in the presence of high threshold, large P-P amplitude MUs with higher discharge rates than lower threshold MUs (reverse onion skin) during the stable portion of the force output. The recruitment of high threshold MUs with higher discharge rates decreased the level of common drive from the cross-correlation (Rxy) = 0.79 at 20 % MVC to Rxy = 0.68 at 100 % MVC (p < 0.01), but it remained high. As the interference pattern becomes more complex with the recruitment of more motor units at higher force outputs, intramuscular electrodes may be more discriminating while recording motor unit activity leading to the identification of both the ‘reverse onion skin’ and ‘onion skin’ phenomenon being present.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".