ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2013
Distinguishing synchronous and time-varying synergies using point process interval statistics: motor primitives in frog and rat.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reconstructing hand gestures with synergies extracted from dance movements.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Explaining human motor coordination via the synergy expansion hypothesis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Muscle synergies are associated with intermuscular coherence and cortico-synergy coherence in an isometric upper limb task.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- A Novel Muscle Synergy Extraction Method Used for Motor Function Evaluation of Stroke Patients: A Pilot Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A three-dimensional musculoskeletal model of the dog.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Neuromechanical Model of Rat Hindlimb Walking with Two-Layer CPGs.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Making the Coupled Gaussian Process Dynamical Model Modular and Scalable with Variational Approximations.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- A Systematic Review on Muscle Synergies: From Building Blocks of Motor Behavior to a Neurorehabilitation Tool.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2018Review
- Editorial: Modularity in motor control: from muscle synergies to cognitive action representation.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2015Article
- Model selection for the extraction of movement primitives.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We present and apply a method that uses point process statistics to discriminate the forms of synergies in motor pattern data, prior to explicit synergy extraction. The method uses electromyogram (EMG) pulse peak timing or onset timing. Peak timing is preferable in complex patterns where pulse onsets may be overlapping. An interval statistic derived from the point processes of EMG peak timings distinguishes time-varying synergies from synchronous synergies (SS). Model data shows that the statistic is robust for most conditions. Its application to both frog hindlimb EMG and rat locomotion hindlimb EMG show data from these preparations is clearly most consistent with synchronous synergy models (p < 0.001). Additional direct tests of pulse and interval relations in frog data further bolster the support for synchronous synergy mechanisms in these data. Our method and analyses support separated control of rhythm and pattern of motor primitives, with the low level execution primitives comprising pulsed SS in both frog and rat, and both episodic and rhythmic behaviors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.