Relative Contribution of Proprioceptive and Vestibular Sensory Systems to Locomotion: Opportunities for Discovery in the Age of Molecular Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Locomotion is a fundamental animal behavior required for survival and has been the subject of neuroscience research for centuries. In terrestrial mammals, the rhythmic and coordinated leg movements during locomotion are controlled by a combination of interconnected neurons in the spinal cord, referred as to the central pattern generator, and sensory feedback from the segmental somatosensory system and supraspinal centers such as the vestibular system. How segmental somatosensory and the vestibular systems work in parallel to enable terrestrial mammals to locomote in a natural environment is still relatively obscure. In this review, we first briefly describe what is known about how the two sensory systems control locomotion and use this information to formulate a hypothesis that the weight of the role of segmental feedback is less important at slower speeds but increases at higher speeds, whereas the weight of the role of vestibular system has the opposite relation. The new avenues presented by the latest developments in molecular sciences using the mouse as the model system allow the direct testing of the hypothesis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".