Uncovering and leveraging the return of voluntary motor programs after paralysis using a bi-cortical neuroprosthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rehabilitative and neuroprosthetic approaches after spinal cord injury (SCI) aim to reestablish voluntary control of movement. Promoting recovery requires a mechanistic understanding of the return of volition over action, but the relationship between re-emerging cortical commands and the return of locomotion is not well established. We introduced a neuroprosthesis delivering targeted bi-cortical stimulation in a clinically relevant contusive SCI model. In healthy and SCI cats, we controlled hindlimb locomotor output by tuning stimulation timing, duration, amplitude, and site. In intact cats, we unveiled a large repertoire of motor programs. After SCI, the evoked hindlimb lifts were highly stereotyped, yet effective in modulating gait and alleviating bilateral foot drag. Results suggest that the neural substrate underpinning motor recovery had traded-off selectivity for efficacy. Longitudinal tests revealed that the return of locomotion after SCI was correlated with recovery of the descending drive, which advocates for rehabilitation interventions directed at the cortical target.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".