Insights from models of rhythmic motor systems
From enfascination
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I was tempted to see the paper as too broad, but it is well cited, and over all a good brief review. Lots of tadpoles and sea slugs. I'm not all that moved by the argument, I'm already coming from that direction. Its use to me will be in the citations. | I was tempted to see the paper as too broad, but it is well cited, and over all a good brief review. Lots of tadpoles and sea slugs. I'm not all that moved by the argument, I'm already coming from that direction. Its use to me will be in the citations. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category: Sept 08 Readings]] | ||
Latest revision as of 03:10, 16 September 2008
This paper was a broad review making a general argument that biomechanical models of locomotion that relay only on top down control from a CPG won't capture everything (paper provides many papers that establish confounds to a strict top down perspective). It also argues for some of the merits of looking at locomotion from a 'rhythmic motor systems' perspective. It seems to be the kind of paper that organizes the views of the emerging consensus and presents a case to the last holdouts. He seems to be speaking to a bi9omechanics audience.
I was tempted to see the paper as too broad, but it is well cited, and over all a good brief review. Lots of tadpoles and sea slugs. I'm not all that moved by the argument, I'm already coming from that direction. Its use to me will be in the citations.