Soleus H-reflex excitability during standing with stable and unstable light touch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light touch reduces sway when participants stand with their eyes closed. Unexpected displacement of the touch reference induces a "false-positive" balance correction in most participants. However, this response is only observed with the first displacement, with subsequent displacements eliciting an arm-extension response. This suggests that the sensorimotor processes involved in stabilizing sway from light touch are rapidly adapted within a single trial. We hypothesized that this change in sensorimotor behaviour would be reflected in changes in the excitability of the soleus H-reflex. Soleus H-reflexes and M-waves, along with background muscle activity, were obtained from ten healthy participants during five standing conditions: 1) eyes open (EO), 2) eyes open with touch (EOT), 3) eyes closed (EC), 4) eyes closed with touch (ECT), and 5) eyes closed touching a reference that has been unexpectedly and repeatedly displaced (ECP). Postural sway was evaluated in each condition, inferred from the motion of the centre of pressure recorded with the use of a force plate. As expected, H-reflexes were suppressed, while sway parameters were increased, during the EC condition, when compared with EO, EOT and ECT. In contrast, H-reflexes during the ECP condition were suppressed comparable to the EC condition, while the sway parameters were not similarly increased. We suggest that the suppression of the H-reflex during the ECP condition reflects an inferred change in the sensorimotor task; specifically switching from utilizing the light touch reference as an external spatial reference, to engaging the touch reference as a target to be maintained.
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) | 0.001 | 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".