MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309265099 · doi:10.1007/s00422-022-00951-8

Variational and phase response analysis for limit cycles with hard boundaries, with applications to neuromechanical control problems

2022· article· en· W4309265099 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Cybernetics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Information and Communications TechnologyMedical Research CouncilInstituto de Salud Carlos IIINational Science FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNational Institute on Drug AbuseUK Research and InnovationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of EnergyAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceCentral pattern generatorNonlinear systemLimit cycleMotor controlSensory systemNeural systemNeuroscienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsRhythmPsychologyBiologyControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motor systems show an overall robustness, but because they are highly nonlinear, understanding how they achieve robustness is difficult. In many rhythmic systems, robustness against perturbations involves response of both the shape and the timing of the trajectory. This makes the study of robustness even more challenging. To understand how a motor system produces robust behaviors in a variable environment, we consider a neuromechanical model of motor patterns in the feeding apparatus of the marine mollusk Aplysia californica (Shaw et al. in J Comput Neurosci 38(1):25-51, 2015; Lyttle et al. in Biol Cybern 111(1):25-47, 2017). We established in (Wang et al. in SIAM J Appl Dyn Syst 20(2):701-744, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1344974 ) the tools for studying combined shape and timing responses of limit cycle systems under sustained perturbations and here apply them to study robustness of the neuromechanical model against increased mechanical load during swallowing. Interestingly, we discover that nonlinear biomechanical properties confer resilience by immediately increasing resistance to applied loads. In contrast, the effect of changed sensory feedback signal is significantly delayed by the firing rates' hard boundary properties. Our analysis suggests that sensory feedback contributes to robustness in swallowing primarily by shifting the timing of neural activation involved in the power stroke of the motor cycle (retraction). This effect enables the system to generate stronger retractor muscle forces to compensate for the increased load, and hence achieve strong robustness. The approaches that we are applying to understanding a neuromechanical model in Aplysia, and the results that we have obtained, are likely to provide insights into the function of other motor systems that encounter changing mechanical loads and hard boundaries, both due to mechanical and neuronal firing properties.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.220 · 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