Conscious, Unconscious & Involuntary Control of Locomotion & Comparable Stereotyped Motor Behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is generally believed that voluntary movements are controlled by brain structures. Signals from cortical areas (e.g., primary motor cortex) are specifically considered to underlie the expression of volitional motor behaviors such as pointing finger or hand reaching for a bottle. However, there are also compelling evidence and breakthrough findings demonstrating that some motor behaviors, especially rhythmic and/or stereotyped, can also be unconsciously and/or involuntary controlled for the most part. For instance, the classical Ia reflex, a simple stereotyped, monosynaptic, and involuntary mediated motor response can be consciously felt in some circumstances whereas the Ib disynaptic reflex is always completely involuntary and unconscious. The pioneering work of Graham Brown in the early 1900s provided evidence of involuntary control mechanisms even for more complex stereotyped behaviors such as basic walking or running that can be mediated in complete absence of supraspinal inputs. In the 70s, Grillner and Zangger clearly showed that basic locomotor activities can indeed be induced without brain structures and sensory inputs in completely decerebrate and rhizotomized animals. Other findings showed subsequently comparable brainstem and/or spinal control mechanisms for many other complex rhythmic stereotyped motor behaviors such as mastication, deglutition, respiration, micturition, defecation, and ejaculation. The relevance of such findings for research on the neural control of movements as well as on the role of neural correlates of mindful (e.g., DMN, DAN, etc.) movements is discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".