Trial-to-trial dynamics and learning in a generalized, redundant reaching task.

If humans exploit task redundancies as a general strategy, they should do so even if the redundancy is decoupled from the physical implementation of the task itself. Here, we derived a family of goal functions that explicitly defined infinite possible redundancies between distance (D) and time (T) for unidirectional reaching. All [T, D] combinations satisfying any specific goal function defined a goal-equivalent manifold (GEM). We tested how humans learned two such functions, D/T = c (constant speed) and D·T = c, that were very different but could both be achieved by neurophysiologically and biomechanically similar reaching movements. Subjects were never explicitly shown either relationship, but only instructed to minimize their errors. Subjects exhibited significant learning and consolidation of learning for both tasks. Initial error magnitudes were higher, but learning rates were faster, for the D·T task than for the D/T task. Learning the D/T task first facilitated subsequent learning of the D·T task. Conversely, learning the D·T task first interfered with subsequent learning of the D/T task. Analyses of trial-to-trial dynamics demonstrated that subjects actively corrected deviations perpendicular to each GEM faster than deviations along each GEM to the same degree for both tasks, despite exhibiting significantly greater variance ratios for the D/T task. Variance measures alone failed to capture critical features of trial-to-trial control. Humans actively exploited these abstract task redundancies, even though they did not have to. They did not use readily available alternative strategies that could have achieved the same performance.

[1]  Jonathan B Dingwell,et al.  Differences between local and orbital dynamic stability during human walking. , 2007, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[2]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[3]  E Burdet,et al.  Motor memory and local minimization of error and effort, not global optimization, determine motor behavior. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  M. Brainard,et al.  Performance variability enables adaptive plasticity of ‘crystallized’ adult birdsong , 2007, Nature.

[5]  Jordan A Taylor,et al.  Trial-by-trial motor adaptation: a window into elemental neural computation. , 2007, Progress in brain research.

[6]  A. Faisal,et al.  Noise in the nervous system , 2008, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[7]  R. C. Oldfield The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[8]  S. Strogatz Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering , 1995 .

[9]  M. Latash,et al.  Motor Control Strategies Revealed in the Structure of Motor Variability , 2002, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[10]  Gregor Schöner,et al.  Coordination underlying the control of whole body momentum during sit-to-stand. , 2002, Gait & posture.

[11]  J. Dingwell,et al.  The effects of neuromuscular fatigue on task performance during repetitive goal-directed movements , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[12]  Etienne Burdet,et al.  Dissociating Variability and Effort as Determinants of Coordination , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[13]  A. Faisal,et al.  Near Optimal Combination of Sensory and Motor Uncertainty in Time During a Naturalistic Perception-Action Task , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Generalization in vision and motor control , 2004, Nature.

[15]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Generalization of Motor Learning Depends on the History of Prior Action , 2006, PLoS biology.

[16]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Influence of motor learning on utilizing path redundancy , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[17]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  How Each Movement Changes the Next: An Experimental and Theoretical Study of Fast Adaptive Priors in Reaching , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  R. Shadmehr,et al.  Neural correlates of motor memory consolidation. , 1997, Science.

[19]  R Shadmehr,et al.  Spatial Generalization from Learning Dynamics of Reaching Movements , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[20]  E. Todorov Optimality principles in sensorimotor control , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[21]  R A Scheidt,et al.  Learning to move amid uncertainty. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[22]  Richard B Ivry,et al.  Task goals influence online corrections and adaptation of reaching movements. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  Young-Hui Chang,et al.  Rate-dependent control strategies stabilize limb forces during human locomotion , 2010, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[24]  W. Bialek,et al.  A sensory source for motor variation , 2005, Nature.

[25]  Paola Cesari,et al.  Body-goal Variability Mapping in an Aiming Task , 2006, Biological Cybernetics.

[26]  Daniel M. Wolpert,et al.  Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning , 1998, Nature.

[27]  Kurt A. Thoroughman,et al.  Trial-by-trial transformation of error into sensorimotor adaptation changes with environmental dynamics. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[28]  Sascha E. Engelbrecht,et al.  Minimum Principles in Motor Control. , 2001, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[29]  M. Latash,et al.  Motor control theories and their applications. , 2010, Medicina.

[30]  James Theiler,et al.  Testing for nonlinearity in time series: the method of surrogate data , 1992 .

[31]  T. Brashers-Krug,et al.  Functional Stages in the Formation of Human Long-Term Motor Memory , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  Neuromotor Noise, Error Tolerance and Velocity-Dependent Costs in Skilled Performance , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[33]  M. Hallett,et al.  Velocity sensitivity of human muscle spindle afferents and slowly adapting type II cutaneous mechanoreceptors. , 1995, The Journal of physiology.

[34]  R. Shadmehr,et al.  Interacting Adaptive Processes with Different Timescales Underlie Short-Term Motor Learning , 2006, PLoS biology.

[35]  Mark L. Latash,et al.  The role of kinematic redundancy in adaptation of reaching , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[36]  R. Carpenter,et al.  The influence of urgency on decision time , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[37]  Emanuel Todorov,et al.  Structured variability of muscle activations supports the minimal intervention principle of motor control. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[38]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Internal models of limb dynamics and the encoding of limb state , 2005, Journal of neural engineering.

[39]  Scott T Grafton Malleable templates: reshaping our crystallized skills to create new outcomes , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  Kurt A. Thoroughman,et al.  Beside the point: motor adaptation without feedback-based error correction in task-irrelevant conditions. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[41]  C. Shea,et al.  Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[42]  N. A. Bernshteĭn The co-ordination and regulation of movements , 1967 .

[43]  Jonathan B. Dingwell,et al.  Do Humans Optimally Exploit Redundancy to Control Step Variability in Walking? , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[44]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Calibration of visually guided reaching is driven by error-corrective learning and internal dynamics. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[45]  D. Sternad,et al.  Decomposition of variability in the execution of goal-oriented tasks: three components of skill improvement. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[46]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Estimating the sources of motor errors for adaptation and generalization , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[47]  J. Dingwell,et al.  Nonlinear time series analysis of normal and pathological human walking. , 2000, Chaos.

[48]  Emanuel Todorov,et al.  Evidence for the Flexible Sensorimotor Strategies Predicted by Optimal Feedback Control , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[49]  Kelvin E. Jones,et al.  Neuronal variability: noise or part of the signal? , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[50]  S. Scott Optimal feedback control and the neural basis of volitional motor control , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[51]  G. Schöner,et al.  Analyzing variance in multi-degree-of-freedom movements: uncovering structure versus extracting correlations. , 2007, Motor control.

[52]  Tim Kiemel,et al.  Control and estimation of posture during quiet stance depends on multijoint coordination. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[53]  Joseph P. Cusumano,et al.  Inter-Trial Dynamics of Repeated Skilled Movements , 2007 .

[54]  Andrew A G Mattar,et al.  Effects of human arm impedance on dynamics learning and generalization. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[55]  J. Dingwell,et al.  Re-interpreting detrended fluctuation analyses of stride-to-stride variability in human walking. , 2010, Gait & posture.

[56]  T. Schreiber,et al.  Surrogate time series , 1999, chao-dyn/9909037.

[57]  R. Ratcliff Putting noise into neurophysiological models of simple decision making , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[58]  Mark D. McDonnell,et al.  The benefits of noise in neural systems: bridging theory and experiment , 2011, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[59]  J J Collins,et al.  The redundant nature of locomotor optimization laws. , 1995, Journal of biomechanics.

[60]  J. Scholz,et al.  Learning a throwing task is associated with differential changes in the use of motor abundance , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[61]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  STRIDE-TO-STRIDE VARIABILITY IN HUMAN WALKING IS NOT “ NOISE ” , 1999 .

[62]  Karl J. Friston What Is Optimal about Motor Control? , 2011, Neuron.

[63]  R. J. Beers,et al.  Motor Learning Is Optimally Tuned to the Properties of Motor Noise , 2009, Neuron.

[64]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Motor Learning through Induced Variability at the Task Goal and Execution Redundancy Levels , 2010, Journal of motor behavior.

[65]  E. Bizzi,et al.  Consolidation in human motor memory , 1996, Nature.

[66]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning , 2004, Nature.

[67]  Lisa Katharina Pendt,et al.  Motor Skill Learning, Retention, and Control Deficits in Parkinson's Disease , 2011, PloS one.

[68]  R. Porter Progress in Brain Research , 1965, Nature.

[69]  D. Sternad,et al.  Variability in motor learning: relocating, channeling and reducing noise , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[70]  R. H. S. Carpenter,et al.  Reply to 'Putting noise into neurophysiological models of simple decision making' , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[71]  Francesco Nori,et al.  Manifold reaching paradigm: how do we handle target redundancy? , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[72]  Daniel A. Braun,et al.  Motor Task Variation Induces Structural Learning , 2009, Current Biology.