Express Arm Responses Appear Bilaterally on Upper-limb Muscles in an Arm Choice Reaching Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract When required, humans can generate very short latency reaches towards visual targets, like catching a falling cellphone. During such rapid reaches, express arm responses are the first wave of upper limb muscle recruitment, occurring ~80-100 ms after target appearance. There is accumulating evidence that express arm responses arise from signaling along the tecto-reticulo-spinal tract, but the involvement of the reticulo-spinal tract has not been well-studied. Since the reticulospinal tract projects bilaterally, we studied whether express arm responses would be generated bilaterally. Human participants (n = 14; 7 female) performed visually guided reaches in a modified emerging target paradigm where either arm could intercept the target. We recorded electromyographic activity bilaterally from the pectoralis major muscle. Our analysis focused on target locations where participants reached with the right arm on some trials, and the left arm on others. In support of the involvement of the reticulospinal tract, express arm responses persisted bilaterally regardless of which arm reached to the target. The latency and magnitude of the express arm response did not depend on whether the arm was chosen to reach or not. However, on the reaching arm, the magnitude of the express arm response was correlated to the level of anticipatory activity. The bilateral generation of express arm responses supports the involvement of the reticulo-spinal tract. We surmise that the correlation between anticipatory activity and the magnitude of express arm responses on the reaching arm arises from convergence of cortically-derived signals with a parallel subcortical pathway mediating the express arm response. New and Noteworthy Express arm responses have been proposed to arise from the tecto-reticulo-spinal tract originating within the superior colliculus, but the involvement of the reticulo-spinal tract has not been well studied. Here, we show these responses appear bilaterally in a task where either arm can reach to a newly appearing stimulus. Our results suggest that the most rapid visuomotor transformations for reaching are performed by a subcortical pathway.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".