Neural Correlates of Online Action Preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When performing movements in rapid succession, the brain needs to coordinate ongoing execution with the preparation of an upcoming action. Here we identify the processes and brain areas involved in this ability of online preparation. Human participants (both male and female) performed pairs of single-finger presses or three-finger chords in rapid succession, while 7T fMRI was recorded. In the overlap condition, they could prepare the second movement during the first response and in the nonoverlap condition only after the first response was completed. Despite matched perceptual and movement requirements, fMRI revealed increased brain activity in the overlap condition in regions along the intraparietal sulcus and ventral visual stream. Multivariate analyses suggested that these areas are involved in stimulus identification and action selection. In contrast, the dorsal premotor cortex, known to be involved in planning upcoming movements, showed no discernible signs of heightened activity. This observation suggests that the bottleneck during simultaneous action execution and preparation arises at the level of stimulus identification and action selection, whereas movement planning in the premotor cortex can unfold concurrently with the execution of a current action without requiring additional neural activity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".