Literature DB >> 21311907

Analytical and numerical analysis of inverse optimization problems: conditions of uniqueness and computational methods.

Alexander V Terekhov1, Vladimir M Zatsiorsky.   

Abstract

One of the key problems of motor control is the redundancy problem, in particular how the central nervous system (CNS) chooses an action out of infinitely many possible. A promising way to address this question is to assume that the choice is made based on optimization of a certain cost function. A number of cost functions have been proposed in the literature to explain performance in different motor tasks: from force sharing in grasping to path planning in walking. However, the problem of uniqueness of the cost function(s) was not addressed until recently. In this article, we analyze two methods of finding additive cost functions in inverse optimization problems with linear constraints, so-called linear-additive inverse optimization problems. These methods are based on the Uniqueness Theorem for inverse optimization problems that we proved recently (Terekhov et al., J Math Biol 61(3):423-453, 2010). Using synthetic data, we show that both methods allow for determining the cost function. We analyze the influence of noise on the both methods. Finally, we show how a violation of the conditions of the Uniqueness Theorem may lead to incorrect solutions of the inverse optimization problem.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21311907      PMCID: PMC3098747          DOI: 10.1007/s00422-011-0421-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Cybern        ISSN: 0340-1200            Impact factor:   2.086


  73 in total

1.  A comparison of models explaining muscle activation patterns for isometric contractions.

Authors:  B M van Bolhuis; C C Gielen
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 2.086

2.  Prehension synergies during nonvertical grasping, II: Modeling and optimization.

Authors:  Todd C Pataky; Mark L Latash; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  2004-09-16       Impact factor: 2.086

3.  A 'cheap' optimal control approach to estimate muscle forces in musculoskeletal systems.

Authors:  Luciano Luporini Menegaldo; Agenor de Toledo Fleury; Hans Ingo Weber
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2005-07-19       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Estimation of the muscle force distribution in ballistic motion based on a multibody methodology.

Authors:  Adam Czaplicki; Miguel Silva; Jorge Ambrósio; Orlando Jesus; João Abrantes
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.763

5.  Is coordination of two-joint leg muscles during load lifting consistent with the strategy of minimum fatigue?

Authors:  B I Prilutsky; T Isaka; A M Albrecht; R J Gregor
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Forces of individual cat ankle extensor muscles during locomotion predicted using static optimization.

Authors:  B I Prilutsky; W Herzog; T L Allinger
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Direct comparison of muscle force predictions using linear and nonlinear programming.

Authors:  D R Pedersen; R A Brand; C Cheng; J S Arora
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 2.097

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.  Hierarchical genetic algorithm versus static optimization-investigation of elbow flexion and extension movements.

Authors:  Rositsa T Raikova; Hristo Ts Aladjov
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.712

10.  The inactivation principle: mathematical solutions minimizing the absolute work and biological implications for the planning of arm movements.

Authors:  Bastien Berret; Christian Darlot; Frédéric Jean; Thierry Pozzo; Charalambos Papaxanthis; Jean Paul Gauthier
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  11 in total

1.  Muscle coordination is habitual rather than optimal.

Authors:  Aymar de Rugy; Gerald E Loeb; Timothy J Carroll
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Reproducibility and variability of the cost functions reconstructed from experimental recordings in multifinger prehension.

Authors:  Xun Niu; Mark L Latash; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 1.328

3.  Reconstruction of the unknown optimization cost functions from experimental recordings during static multi-finger prehension.

Authors:  Xun Niu; Alexander V Terekhov; Mark L Latash; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky
Journal:  Motor Control       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 1.422

4.  Optimality versus variability: effect of fatigue in multi-finger redundant tasks.

Authors:  Jaebum Park; Tarkeshwar Singh; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky; Mark L Latash
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Optimization and variability of motor behavior in multifinger tasks: what variables does the brain use?

Authors:  Joel R Martin; Alexander V Terekhov; Mark L Latash; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 1.328

6.  Optimality and stability of intentional and unintentional actions: I. Origins of drifts in performance.

Authors:  Behnoosh Parsa; Alexander Terekhov; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky; Mark L Latash
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Analytical Inverse Optimization in Two-Hand Prehensile Tasks.

Authors:  Behnoosh Parsa; Satyajit Ambike; Alexander Terekhov; Vladimir M Zatsiorsky; Mark L Latash
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 1.328

8.  Forces and moments generated by the human arm: variability and control.

Authors:  Y Xu; A V Terekhov; M L Latash; V M Zatsiorsky
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-09-28       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Effects of Parkinson's disease on optimization and structure of variance in multi-finger tasks.

Authors:  Jaebum Park; Hang Jin Jo; Mechelle M Lewis; Xuemei Huang; Mark L Latash
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Movements that are both variable and optimal.

Authors:  Mark L Latash
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.193

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.