Literature DB >> 11522304

Sensitivity of predicted muscle forces to parameters of the optimization-based human leg model revealed by analytical and numerical analyses.

R T Raikova1, B I Prilutsky.   

Abstract

There are different opinions in the literature on whether the cost functions: the sum of muscle stresses squared and the sum of muscle stresses cubed, can reasonably predict muscle forces in humans. One potential reason for the discrepancy in the results could be that different authors use different sets of model parameters which could substantially affect forces predicted by optimization-based models. In this study, the sensitivity of the optimal solution obtained by minimizing the above cost functions for a planar three degrees-of-freedom (DOF) model of the leg with nine muscles was investigated analytically for the quadratic function and numerically for the cubic function. Analytical results revealed that, generally, the non-zero optimal force of each muscle depends in a very complex non-linear way on moments at all three joints and moment arms and physiological cross-sectional areas (PCSAs) of all muscles. Deviations of the model parameters (moment arms and PCSAs) from their nominal values within a physiologically feasible range affected not only the magnitude of the forces predicted by both criteria, but also the number of non-zero forces in the optimal solution and the combination of muscles with non-zero predicted forces. Muscle force magnitudes calculated by both criteria were similar. They could change several times as model parameters changed, whereas patterns of muscle forces were typically not as sensitive. It is concluded that different opinions in the literature about the behavior of optimization-based models can be potentially explained by differences in employed model parameters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11522304     DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00097-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  18 in total

1.  Spinal muscle forces, internal loads and stability in standing under various postures and loads--application of kinematics-based algorithm.

Authors:  A Shirazi-Adl; M El-Rich; D G Pop; M Parnianpour
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-09-25       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Optimality vs. variability: an example of multi-finger redundant tasks.

Authors:  Jaebum Park; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky; Mark L Latash
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Role of intra-abdominal pressure in the unloading and stabilization of the human spine during static lifting tasks.

Authors:  N Arjmand; A Shirazi-Adl
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-07       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Biomechanical capabilities influence postural control strategies in the cat hindlimb.

Authors:  J Lucas McKay; Thomas J Burkholder; Lena H Ting
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2006-12-06       Impact factor: 2.712

5.  Analysis of squat and stoop dynamic liftings: muscle forces and internal spinal loads.

Authors:  Babak Bazrgari; Aboulfazl Shirazi-Adl; Navid Arjmand
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-11-14       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Comparison of model-predicted and measured moment arms for the rotator cuff muscles.

Authors:  Christopher J Gatti; Clark R Dickerson; Edward K Chadwick; Amy G Mell; Richard E Hughes
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 2.063

7.  Role of optimization criterion in static asymmetric analysis of lumbar spine load.

Authors:  Matej Daniel
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2011-07-29

8.  Is my model good enough? Best practices for verification and validation of musculoskeletal models and simulations of movement.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hicks; Thomas K Uchida; Ajay Seth; Apoorva Rajagopal; Scott L Delp
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 2.097

9.  An analytical approach to the problem of inverse optimization with additive objective functions: an application to human prehension.

Authors:  Alexander V Terekhov; Yakov B Pesin; Xun Niu; Mark L Latash; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 2.259

10.  Structural and functional anatomy of the neck musculature of the dog (Canis familiaris).

Authors:  Amnon Sharir; Joshua Milgram; Ron Shahar
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.610

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.