Literature DB >> 18217853

Optimality of human movement under natural variations of visual-motor uncertainty.

Sergei Gepshtein1, Anna Seydell, Julia Trommershäuser.   

Abstract

Biological movements are prone to error. Different movements lead to different errors, and the distributions of errors depend on movement amplitude and direction. Movement planning would benefit from taking this variability into account, by applying appropriate corrections for movements associated with the different shapes and sizes of error distributions. Here we asked whether the human nervous system can do so. In a game-like task, participants performed rapid sequences of goal-directed pointing movements in different directions, toward stimulus configurations presented at different eccentricities on a slanted touch screen. The task was to accumulate rewards by hitting target regions and to minimize losses by avoiding penalty regions. The distributions of endpoint errors varied in size and degree of anisotropy across stimulus locations. Our participants adjusted their movements toward the different locations accordingly. We compared human behavior with the optimal behavior predicted by ideal movement planner maximizing expected gain. In most cases, human behavior was indistinguishable from optimal. This is evidence that human movement planning approaches statistical optimality by representing the task-relevant movement variability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18217853     DOI: 10.1167/7.5.13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  16 in total

1.  Energy margins in dynamic object manipulation.

Authors:  Christopher J Hasson; Tian Shen; Dagmar Sternad
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Pain relativity in motor control.

Authors:  I T Kurniawan; B Seymour; I Vlaev; J Trommershäuser; R J Dolan; N Chater
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2010-04-30

3.  Dynamic estimation of task-relevant variance in movement under risk.

Authors:  Michael S Landy; Julia Trommershäuser; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-09-12       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 4.  Predictability and Robustness in the Manipulation of Dynamically Complex Objects.

Authors:  Dagmar Sternad; Christopher J Hasson
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Perceptuo-motor, cognitive, and description-based decision-making seem equally good.

Authors:  Andreas Jarvstad; Ulrike Hahn; Simon K Rushton; Paul A Warren
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Manual obstacle avoidance takes into account visual uncertainty, motor noise, and biomechanical costs.

Authors:  Rajal G Cohen; Jason C Biddle; David A Rosenbaum
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Sensory uncertainty impacts avoidance during spatial decisions.

Authors:  Kevin Jarbo; Rory Flemming; Timothy D Verstynen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Dopamine function and the efficiency of human movement.

Authors:  Sergei Gepshtein; Xiaoyan Li; Joseph Snider; Markus Plank; Dongpyo Lee; Howard Poizner
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2013-10-21       Impact factor: 3.225

9.  Prospective Optimization.

Authors:  Terrence J Sejnowski; Howard Poizner; Gary Lynch; Sergei Gepshtein; Ralph J Greenspan
Journal:  Proc IEEE Inst Electr Electron Eng       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 10.961

10.  Grasping objects with environmentally induced position uncertainty.

Authors:  Vassilios N Christopoulos; Paul R Schrater
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.