Simultaneous Quantification of Ankle, Muscle, and Tendon Impedance in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Regulating the impedance of our joints is essential for the effective control of posture and movement. The impedance of a joint is governed mainly by the mechanical properties of the muscle-tendon units spanning it. Many studies have quantified the net impedance of joints but not the specific contributions from the muscles and tendons. The inability to quantify both muscle and tendon impedance limits the ability to determine the causes underlying altered movement control associated with aging, neuromuscular injury, and other conditions that have different effects on muscle and tendon properties. Therefore, we developed a technique to quantify joint, muscle, and tendon impedance simultaneously and evaluated this technique at the human ankle. METHODS: We used a single degree of freedom actuator to deliver pseudorandom rotations to the ankle while measuring the corresponding torques. We simultaneously measured the displacement of the medial gastrocnemius muscle-tendon junction with B-mode ultrasound. From these experimental measurements, we were able to estimate ankle, muscle, and tendon impedance using non-parametric system identification. RESULTS: We validated our estimates by comparing them to previously reported measurements of muscle and tendon stiffness, the position-dependent component of impedance, to demonstrate that our technique generates reliable estimates of these properties. CONCLUSION: Our approach can be used to clarify the respective contributions from the muscle and tendon to the net mechanics of a joint. SIGNIFICANCE: This is a critical step forward in the ultimate goal of understanding how muscles and tendons govern ankle impedance during posture and movement.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".