Exploring the Consistent Roles of Motor Areas Across Voluntary Movement and Locomotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple cortical motor areas are critically involved in the voluntary control of discrete movement (e.g., reaching) and gait. Here, we outline experimental findings in nonhuman primates with clinical reports and research in humans that explain characteristic movement control mechanisms in the primary, supplementary, and presupplementary motor areas, as well as in the dorsal premotor area. We then focus on single-neuron activity recorded while monkeys performed motor sequences consisting of multiple discrete movements, and we consider how area-specific control mechanisms may contribute to the performance of complex movements. Following this, we explore the motor areas in cats that we have considered as analogs of those in primates based on similarities in their cortical surface topology, anatomic connections, microstimulation effects, and activity patterns. Emphasizing that discrete movement and gait modification entail similar control mechanisms, we argue that single-neuron activity in each area of the cat during gait modification is compatible with the function ascribed to the activity in the corresponding area in primates, recorded during the performance of discrete movements. The findings that demonstrate the premotor areas' contribution to locomotion, currently unique to the cat model, should offer highly valuable insights into the control mechanisms of locomotion in primates, including humans.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".