MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400057335 · doi:10.1007/s00422-024-00990-3

Full Hill-type muscle model of the I1/I3 retractor muscle complex in Aplysia californica

2024· article· en· W4400057335 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ravesh Sukhnandan, Qianxue Chen, Jiayi Shen, Samantha Pao, Yu Huan, Gregory P. Sutton, Jeffrey P. Gill, Hillel J. Chiel, Victoria A. Webster‐Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Cybernetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUK Research and InnovationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCarnegie Mellon UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAplysiaIsometric exerciseKinematicsMuscle contractionStiffnessMuscular systemNeuroscienceContext (archaeology)AnatomyComputer scienceBiological systemPhysicsEngineeringBiologyStructural engineeringClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coordination of complex behavior requires knowledge of both neural dynamics and the mechanics of the periphery. The feeding system of Aplysia californica is an excellent model for investigating questions in soft body systems' neuromechanics because of its experimental tractability. Prior work has attempted to elucidate the mechanical properties of the periphery by using a Hill-type muscle model to characterize the force generation capabilities of the key protractor muscle responsible for moving Aplysia's grasper anteriorly, the I2 muscle. However, the I1/I3 muscle, which is the main driver of retractions of Aplysia's grasper, has not been characterized. Because of the importance of the musculature's properties in generating functional behavior, understanding the properties of muscles like the I1/I3 complex may help to create more realistic simulations of the feeding behavior of Aplysia, which can aid in greater understanding of the neuromechanics of soft-bodied systems. To bridge this gap, in this work, the I1/I3 muscle complex was characterized using force-frequency, length-tension, and force-velocity experiments and showed that a Hill-type model can accurately predict its force-generation properties. Furthermore, the muscle's peak isometric force and stiffness were found to exceed those of the I2 muscle, and these results were analyzed in the context of prior studies on the I1/I3 complex's kinematics in vivo.

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 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 score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.159 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological CyberneticsSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207