Control of Mammalian Locomotion by Somatosensory Feedback
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract When animals walk overground, mechanical stimuli activate various receptors located in muscles, joints, and skin. Afferents from these mechanoreceptors project to neuronal networks controlling locomotion in the spinal cord and brain. The dynamic interactions between the control systems at different levels of the neuraxis ensure that locomotion adjusts to its environment and meets task demands. In this article, we describe and discuss the essential contribution of somatosensory feedback to locomotion. We start with a discussion of how biomechanical properties of the body affect somatosensory feedback. We follow with the different types of mechanoreceptors and somatosensory afferents and their activity during locomotion. We then describe central projections to locomotor networks and the modulation of somatosensory feedback during locomotion and its mechanisms. We then discuss experimental approaches and animal models used to investigate the control of locomotion by somatosensory feedback before providing an overview of the different functional roles of somatosensory feedback for locomotion. Lastly, we briefly describe the role of somatosensory feedback in the recovery of locomotion after neurological injury. We highlight the fact that somatosensory feedback is an essential component of a highly integrated system for locomotor control. © 2021 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 11:1‐71, 2021.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it