Mobility of the human foot’s medial arch helps enable upright bipedal locomotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developing the ability to habitually walk and run upright on two feet is one of the most significant transformations to have occurred in human evolution. Many musculoskeletal adaptations enabled bipedal locomotion, including dramatic structural changes to the foot and, in particular, the evolution of an elevated medial arch. The foot's arched structure has previously been assumed to play a central role in directly propelling the center of mass forward and upward through leverage about the toes and a spring-like energy recoil. However, it is unclear whether or how the plantarflexion mobility and height of the medial arch support its propulsive lever function. We use high-speed biplanar x-ray measurements of foot bone motion on seven participants while walking and running and compare their motion to a subject-specific model without arch recoil. We show that regardless of intraspecific differences in medial arch height, arch recoil enables a longer contact time and favorable propulsive conditions at the ankle for walking upright on an extended leg. The generally overlooked navicular-medial cuneiform joint is primarily responsible for arch recoil in human arches. The mechanism through which arch recoil enables an upright ankle posture may have helped drive the evolution of the longitudinal arch after our last common ancestor with chimpanzees, who lack arch plantarflexion mobility during push-off. Future morphological investigations of the navicular-medial cuneiform joint will likely provide new interpretations of the fossil record. Our work further suggests that enabling medial arch recoil in footwear and surgical interventions may be critical for maintaining the ankle's natural propulsive ability.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".