Literature DB >> 22798036

Frequency-domain identification of the human controller.

Henrik Gollee1, Adamantia Mamma, Ian D Loram, Peter J Gawthrop.   

Abstract

System identification techniques applied to experimental human-in-the-loop data provide an objective test of three alternative control-theoretical models of the human control system: non-predictive control, predictive control, and intermittent predictive control. A two-stage approach to the identification of a single-input single-output control system is used: first, the closed-loop frequency response is derived using the periodic property of the experimental data, followed by the fitting of a parametric model. While this approach is well-established for non-predictive and predictive control, it is here used for the first time with intermittent predictive control. This technique is applied to data from experiments with human volunteers who use one of two control strategies, focusing either on position or on velocity, to manually control a virtual, unstable load which requires sustained feedback to maintain position or low velocity. The results show firstly that the non-predictive controller does not fit the data as well as the other two models, and secondly that the predictive and intermittent predictive controllers provide equally good models which cannot be distinguished using this approach. Importantly, the second observation implies that sustained visual manual control is compatible with intermittent control, and that previous results suggesting a continuous control model for the human control system do not rule out intermittent control as an alternative hypothesis. Thirdly, the parameters identified reflect the control strategy adopted by the human controller.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22798036     DOI: 10.1007/s00422-012-0503-9

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


  5 in total

1.  Inferring Broad Regulatory Biology from Time Course Data: Have We Reached an Upper Bound under Constraints Typical of In Vivo Studies?

Authors:  Saurabh Vashishtha; Gordon Broderick; Travis J A Craddock; Mary Ann Fletcher; Nancy G Klimas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Visuo-manual tracking: does intermittent control with aperiodic sampling explain linear power and non-linear remnant without sensorimotor noise?

Authors:  Henrik Gollee; Peter J Gawthrop; Martin Lakie; Ian D Loram
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Analysis of Control Characteristics between Dominant and Non-Dominant Hands by Transient Responses of Circular Tracking Movements in 3D Virtual Reality Space.

Authors:  Wookhyun Park; Woong Choi; Hanjin Jo; Geonhui Lee; Jaehyo Kim
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 3.576

4.  What is the contribution of voluntary and reflex processes to sensorimotor control of balance?

Authors:  Amel Cherif; Jacopo Zenzeri; Ian Loram
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-09-29

5.  Analysis of Visuo Motor Control between Dominant Hand and Non-Dominant Hand for Effective Human-Robot Collaboration.

Authors:  Hanjin Jo; Woong Choi; Geonhui Lee; Wookhyun Park; Jaehyo Kim
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-08       Impact factor: 3.576

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.