Literature DB >> 21273407

Flexible, task-dependent use of sensory feedback to control hand movements.

David C Knill1, Amulya Bondada, Manu Chhabra.   

Abstract

We tested whether changing accuracy demands for simple pointing movements leads humans to adjust the feedback control laws that map sensory signals from the moving hand to motor commands. Subjects made repeated pointing movements in a virtual environment to touch a button whose shape varied randomly from trial to trial-between squares, rectangles oriented perpendicular to the movement path, and rectangles oriented parallel to the movement path. Subjects performed the task on a horizontal table but saw the target configuration and a virtual rendering of their pointing finger through a mirror mounted between a monitor and the table. On one-third of trials, the position of the virtual finger was perturbed by ±1 cm either in the movement direction or perpendicular to the movement direction when the finger passed behind an occluder. Subjects corrected quickly for the perturbations despite not consciously noticing them; however, they corrected almost twice as much for perturbations aligned with the narrow dimension of a target than for perturbations aligned with the long dimension. These changes in apparent feedback gain appeared in the kinematic trajectories soon after the time of the perturbations, indicating that they reflect differences in the feedback control law used throughout the duration of movements. The results indicate that the brain adjusts its feedback control law for individual movements "on demand" to fit task demands. Simulations of optimal control laws for a two-joint arm show that accuracy demands alone, coupled with signal-dependent noise, lead to qualitatively the same behavior.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21273407      PMCID: PMC3047484          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3522-09.2011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  37 in total

1.  The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task.

Authors:  J P Scholz; G Schöner
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Voluntary modification of automatic arm movements evoked by motion of a visual target.

Authors:  B L Day; I N Lyon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination.

Authors:  Emanuel Todorov; Michael I Jordan
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning.

Authors:  Konrad P Körding; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Virtual lesions of the anterior intraparietal area disrupt goal-dependent on-line adjustments of grasp.

Authors:  Eugene Tunik; Scott H Frey; Scott T Grafton
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2005-03-20       Impact factor: 24.884

6.  Bimanual coordination as task-dependent linear control policies.

Authors:  Jörn Diedrichsen; Noreen Dowling
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2009-01-07       Impact factor: 2.161

7.  Disentangling the role of spatial scale, separation and eccentricity in Weber's law for position.

Authors:  D Whitaker; K Latham
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model.

Authors:  T Flash; N Hogan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Dynamic interactions between limb segments during planar arm movement.

Authors:  M J Hollerbach; T Flash
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 2.086

10.  Humans use continuous visual feedback from the hand to control fast reaching movements.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Saunders; David C Knill
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-08-06       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  34 in total

Review 1.  Optimal feedback control and the long-latency stretch response.

Authors:  J Andrew Pruszynski; Stephen H Scott
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  The temporal evolution of feedback gains rapidly update to task demands.

Authors:  Michael Dimitriou; Daniel M Wolpert; David W Franklin
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  How the required precision influences the way we intercept a moving object.

Authors:  Eli Brenner; Rouwen Cañal-Bruland; Robert J van Beers
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Congruent visual and proprioceptive information results in a better encoding of initial hand position.

Authors:  Louis-Nicolas Veilleux; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Distinct and flexible rates of online control.

Authors:  John de Grosbois; Luc Tremblay
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-07-21

6.  Task-dependent vestibular feedback responses in reaching.

Authors:  Johannes Keyser; W Pieter Medendorp; Luc P J Selen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Visuomotor feedback gains are modulated by gaze position.

Authors:  Anouk J de Brouwer; Jason P Gallivan; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Parallel specification of competing sensorimotor control policies for alternative action options.

Authors:  Jason P Gallivan; Lindsey Logan; Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 24.884

9.  The influence of task outcome on implicit motor learning.

Authors:  Hyosub E Kim; Darius E Parvin; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 8.140

10.  Visual Feedback Processing of the Limb Involves Two Distinct Phases.

Authors:  Kevin P Cross; Tyler Cluff; Tomohiko Takei; Stephen H Scott
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.