Emergence of robust self-organized undulatory swimming based on local hydrodynamic force sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Undulatory swimming represents an ideal behavior to investigate locomotion control and the role of the underlying central and peripheral components in the spinal cord. Many vertebrate swimmers have central pattern generators and local pressure-sensitive receptors that provide information about the surrounding fluid. However, it remains difficult to study experimentally how these sensors influence motor commands in these animals. Here, using a specifically designed robot that captures the essential components of the animal neuromechanical system and using simulations, we tested the hypothesis that sensed hydrodynamic pressure forces can entrain body actuation through local feedback loops. We found evidence that this peripheral mechanism leads to self-organized undulatory swimming by providing intersegmental coordination and body oscillations. Swimming can be redundantly induced by central mechanisms, and we show that, therefore, a combination of both central and peripheral mechanisms offers a higher robustness against neural disruptions than any of them alone, which potentially explains how some vertebrates retain locomotor capabilities after spinal cord lesions. These results broaden our understanding of animal locomotion and expand our knowledge for the design of robust and modular robots that physically interact with the environment.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".