Does anyone know of any study with EMG saying that the dominant limb activates more than the nondominant?

I need to a) know if its built-in hardware circuit network amplify the raw signal and b) if its built-in hardware circuit network convert the raw signal to an average root-mean-square (rms).

EMG is not a valid measure method, but is still used in resistance training.

In case of muscle force calculation:

-There is the insertion tendon that plays a role.

-However, also the origin tendon should be included in the force calculation.

-Muscle fiber have lateral force transmission through intracellulair skeleton, sarcolemma, costameres, endomysium, perimysium and epimysium.

Muscle fiber have longititudinal force transmission, but in the sarcomere there is titin as structure that has an influence.

Furthermore, muscle fiber consists out of different MHC muscle fiber types.

-At one cross section there can be a MHC IIa, at another a MHC I.

-At one cross section there can be a MHC IIa, at another a MHC IIx.

So this would imply taking multiple cross sections?

How can this be dealt with in research?

While reading articles related to EMG analysis, two concepts caught my attention. One of them is the Hilbert transform, and the other is the envelope. First, I haven't come across this transform often in many software tools (although I might have missed it). Instead, it is stated that rectification and RMS methods can also be used. I have come to the conclusion that the Hilbert transform might be more suitable if you need instantaneous amplitude and phase information or if you want to examine very subtle amplitude changes and instantaneous phase differences in the signal.

I usually used rectification and RMS methods. So, in this case;

I would appreciate your insights on this topic. Thank you in advance.

I have found that when doing isometric MVCs prior to golf swing data, that the swing data tends to be higher that the MVCs i.e. Swing produces 120% of MVC or similar. If this is the case is more benefical to use within testing maximums instead of pre-testing isometric MVCs.

Can passive movement of a joint, for example plantar/dorsiflexion of ankle joint, elicit EMG activity in tibialis anterior and gastrocnemius muscles?

Dimberg fixed the intertrial intervals in his standard procedure in the article "facial electromyography and emotional reactions" at 25-45 s. This is generally used in studies of facial reactions by EMG. What is the justification of this choice ?

In a comparison of the muscular activation (measured by SEMG) between two groups we found significant lower activation in Q-ceps and Hamstrings in one group. Any suggestions or explanations? What are the possible causes for lower muscle activation? More strength, better passive control, less dynamic movement, etc.? Note: Speed was not different between the groups.