MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291003108 · doi:10.3389/fncom.2022.851485

Motor cortex outputs evoked by long-duration microstimulation encode synergistic muscle activation patterns not controlled movement trajectories

2022· article· en· W4291003108 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles Capaday

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Computational Neuroscience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsForelimbMicrostimulationNeuroscienceMotor cortexStimulus (psychology)AnatomyEvoked potentialBicucullinePhysicsChemistryStimulationMedicineGABAA receptorBiologyPsychologyReceptorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) parameters on the evoked electromyographic (EMG) responses and resulting limb movement were investigated. In ketamine-anesthetized cats, paw movement kinematics in 3D and EMG activity from 8 to 12 forelimb muscles evoked by ICMS applied to the forelimb area of the cat motor cortex (MCx) were recorded. The EMG responses evoked by ICMS were also compared to those evoked by focal ictal bursts induced by the iontophoretic ejection of the GABA A receptor antagonist bicuculline methochloride (BIC) at the same cortical point. The effects of different initial limb starting positions on movement trajectories resulting from long-duration ICMS were also studied. The ICMS duration did not affect the evoked muscle activation pattern (MAP). Short (50 ms) and long (500 ms) stimulus trains activated the same muscles in the same proportions. MAPs could, however, be modified by gradually increasing the stimulus intensity. MAPs evoked by focal ictal bursts were also highly correlated with those obtained by ICMS at the same cortical point. Varying the initial position of the forelimb did not change the MAPs evoked from a cortical point. Consequently, the evoked movements reached nearly the same final end point and posture, with variability. However, the movement trajectories were quite different depending on the initial limb configuration and starting position of the paw. The evoked movement trajectory was most natural when the forelimb lay pendant ~ perpendicular to the ground (i.e., in equilibrium with the gravitational force). From other starting positions, the movements did not appear natural. These observations demonstrate that while the output of the cortical point evokes a seemingly coordinated limb movement from a rest position, it does not specify a particular movement direction or a controlled trajectory from other initial positions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Computational NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207