Neural Substrates of Muscle Co-contraction during Dynamic Motor Adaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As we learn to perform a motor task with novel dynamics, the central nervous system must adapt motor commands and modify sensorimotor transformations. The objective of the current research is to identify the neural mechanisms underlying the adaptive process. It has been shown previously that an increase in muscle co-contraction is frequently associated with the initial phase of adaptation and that co-contraction is gradually reduced as performance improves. Our investigation focused on the neural substrates of muscle co-contraction during the course of motor adaptation using a resting-state fMRI approach in healthy human subjects of both genders. We analyzed the functional connectivity in resting-state networks during three phases of adaptation, corresponding to different muscle co-contraction levels and found that change in the strength of functional connectivity in one brain network was correlated with a metric of co-contraction, and in another with a metric of motor learning. We identified the cerebellum as the key component for regulating muscle co-contraction, especially its connection to the inferior parietal lobule, which was particularly prominent in early stage adaptation. A neural link between cerebellum, superior frontal gyrus and motor cortical regions was associated with reduction of co-contraction during later stages of adaptation. We also found reliable changes in the functional connectivity of a network involving primary motor cortex, superior parietal lobule and cerebellum that were specifically related to the motor learning.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".