Literature DB >> 23700129

Adapting to inversion of the visual field: a new twist on an old problem.

Timothy P Lillicrap1, Pablo Moreno-Briseño, Rosalinda Diaz, Douglas B Tweed, Nikolaus F Troje, Juan Fernandez-Ruiz.   

Abstract

While sensorimotor adaptation to prisms that displace the visual field takes minutes, adapting to an inversion of the visual field takes weeks. In spite of a long history of the study, the basis of this profound difference remains poorly understood. Here, we describe the computational issue that underpins this phenomenon and presents experiments designed to explore the mechanisms involved. We show that displacements can be mastered without altering the updated rule used to adjust the motor commands. In contrast, inversions flip the sign of crucial variables called sensitivity derivatives-variables that capture how changes in motor commands affect task error and therefore require an update of the feedback learning rule itself. Models of sensorimotor learning that assume internal estimates of these variables are known and fixed predicted that when the sign of a sensitivity derivative is flipped, adaptations should become increasingly counterproductive. In contrast, models that relearn these derivatives predict that performance should initially worsen, but then improve smoothly and remain stable once the estimate of the new sensitivity derivative has been corrected. Here, we evaluated these predictions by looking at human performance on a set of pointing tasks with vision perturbed by displacing and inverting prisms. Our experimental data corroborate the classic observation that subjects reduce their motor errors under inverted vision. Subjects' accuracy initially worsened and then improved. However, improvement was jagged rather than smooth and performance remained unstable even after 8 days of continually inverted vision, suggesting that subjects improve via an unknown mechanism, perhaps a combination of cognitive and implicit strategies. These results offer a new perspective on classic work with inverted vision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23700129     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-013-3565-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  39 in total

1.  Learning "what" and "how" in a human motor task.

Authors:  V Brooks; F Hilperath; M Brooks; H G Ross; H J Freund
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  1995 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.460

2.  Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; M Kawato
Journal:  Neural Netw       Date:  1998-10

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.  Decorrelation control by the cerebellum achieves oculomotor plant compensation in simulated vestibulo-ocular reflex.

Authors:  Paul Dean; John Porrill; James V Stone
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-09-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Recurrent cerebellar architecture solves the motor-error problem.

Authors:  John Porrill; Paul Dean; James V Stone
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-04-22       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Mechanisms for visuomotor adaptation to left-right reversed vision.

Authors:  Susen Werner; Otmar Bock
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2010-03-20       Impact factor: 2.161

7.  An implicit plan overrides an explicit strategy during visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Pietro Mazzoni; John W Krakauer
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-04-05       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Global plasticity in adult visual cortex following reversal of visual input.

Authors:  Y Sugita
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-04-11       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Flexible cognitive strategies during motor learning.

Authors:  Jordan A Taylor; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 4.475

10.  Motor task variation induces structural learning.

Authors:  Daniel A Braun; Ad Aertsen; Daniel M Wolpert; Carsten Mehring
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2009-02-12       Impact factor: 10.834

View more
  11 in total

1.  Spinocerebellar ataxia type 2 neurodegeneration differentially affects error-based and strategic-based visuomotor learning.

Authors:  Israel Vaca-Palomares; Rosalinda Díaz; Roberto Rodríguez-Labrada; Jacqeline Medrano-Montero; Yaimé Vázquez-Mojena; Luis Velázquez-Pérez; Juan Fernandez-Ruiz
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.847

2.  Reliance on visual attention during visuomotor adaptation: an SSVEP study.

Authors:  Eva-Maria Reuter; Jeffery Bednark; Ross Cunnington
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 3.  Computations underlying sensorimotor learning.

Authors:  Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 6.627

4.  Did We Get Sensorimotor Adaptation Wrong? Implicit Adaptation as Direct Policy Updating Rather than Forward-Model-Based Learning.

Authors:  Alkis M Hadjiosif; John W Krakauer; Adrian M Haith
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Implicit adaptation to mirror reversal is in the correct coordinate system but the wrong direction.

Authors:  Tianhe Wang; Jordan A Taylor
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-10-06       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Multifunctional Setup for Studying Human Motor Control Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Electromyography, Motion Capture, and Virtual Reality.

Authors:  William J Talkington; Bradley S Pollard; Erienne V Olesh; Valeriya Gritsenko
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 1.355

7.  Learning feedback and feedforward control in a mirror-reversed visual environment.

Authors:  Shoko Kasuga; Sebastian Telgen; Junichi Ushiba; Daichi Nozaki; Jörn Diedrichsen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  De novo learning versus adaptation of continuous control in a manual tracking task.

Authors:  Christopher S Yang; Noah J Cowan; Adrian M Haith
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  The Effect of Spatial Working Memory Deterioration on Strategic Visuomotor Learning across Aging.

Authors:  Luis A Uresti-Cabrera; Rosalinda Diaz; Israel Vaca-Palomares; Juan Fernandez-Ruiz
Journal:  Behav Neurol       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 3.342

10.  Motor improvement estimation and task adaptation for personalized robot-aided therapy: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Christian Giang; Elvira Pirondini; Nawal Kinany; Camilla Pierella; Alessandro Panarese; Martina Coscia; Jenifer Miehlbradt; Cécile Magnin; Pierre Nicolo; Adrian Guggisberg; Silvestro Micera
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 2.819

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.