Bimanual coordination as task-dependent linear control policies.

When we perform actions with two hands in everyday life, coordination has to change very quickly depending on task goals. Here, we study these task-dependent changes using a bimanual reaching task in which participants move two separate cursors to two visual targets, or move a single cursor, displayed at the average position of the two hands, to a single target. During the movement, one of the hands is perturbed in a random direction using a viscous curl field. We have previously shown that feedback control, the structure of noise, and adaptation change between these two tasks as predicted by optimal control theory: feedback control is independent when the hands control two cursors, but becomes dependent when they move one cursor together. The same changes are observed even on trials in which no visual feedback about the cursor position is given. One assumption in this model is that coordinative motor commands can be described as a linear function of the state of the left and right hands. Here we test the assumption by studying the feedback corrections for 25 combinations of force fields applied to the two hands. Our study shows that feedback gains are constant across all levels of force fields strength, providing strong evidence that intermanual coordination for this task can accurately be explained by optimal task-dependent linear feedback gains.

[1]  Daniel Cattaert,et al.  Hand coordination in bimanual circle drawing. , 1995 .

[2]  J. Kelso.  Phase transitions and critical behavior in human bimanual coordination. , 1984, The American journal of physiology.

[3]  Emanuel Todorov,et al.  Optimal Control Theory , 2006 .

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

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

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

[7]  E. Todorov,et al.  A generalized iterative LQG method for locally-optimal feedback control of constrained nonlinear stochastic systems , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005, American Control Conference, 2005..

[8]  D. Domkin,et al.  Structure of joint variability in bimanual pointing tasks , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[9]  T D Lee,et al.  Acquiring bimanual skills: contrasting forms of information feedback for interlimb decoupling. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[10]  R. Ivry,et al.  Independent on‐line control of the two hands during bimanual reaching , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[11]  S. Swinnen,et al.  Between-limb asynchronies during bimanual coordination: Effects of manual dominance and attentional cueing , 1996, Neuropsychologia.

[12]  Carol A. Putnam,et al.  On the Space-Time Structure of Human Interlimb Co-Ordination , 1983, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[13]  M. Gazzaniga,et al.  Dissociation of Spatial and Temporal Coupling in the Bimanual Movements of Callosotomy Patients , 1996 .

[14]  H N Zelaznik,et al.  Spatial topological constraints in a bimanual task. , 1991, Acta psychologica.

[15]  R. Ivry,et al.  Moving to Directly Cued Locations Abolishes Spatial Interference During Bimanual Actions , 2001, Psychological science.

[16]  J. Diedrichsen.  Optimal Task-Dependent Changes of Bimanual Feedback Control and Adaptation , 2007, Current Biology.

[17]  Wilfried Kunde,et al.  Goal congruency in bimanual object manipulation. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  Emanuel Todorov,et al.  Stochastic Optimal Control and Estimation Methods Adapted to the Noise Characteristics of the Sensorimotor System , 2005, Neural Computation.

[19]  F A Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task , 1994, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[20]  Donald E. Kirk,et al.  Optimal Control Theory , 1970 .

[21]  W. Prinz.  A common-coding approach to perception and action , 1990 .

[22]  Jörn Diedrichsen,et al.  The role of the corpus callosum in the coupling of bimanual isometric force pulses. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  M. Latash,et al.  A principle of error compensation studied within a task of force production by a redundant set of fingers , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[24]  R. Ivry,et al.  Callosotomy patients exhibit temporal uncoupling during continuous bimanual movements , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[25]  Tamar Flash,et al.  Computational approaches to motor control , 2001, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[26]  R. Shadmehr,et al.  Why Does the Brain Predict Sensory Consequences of Oculomotor Commands? Optimal Integration of the Predicted and the Actual Sensory Feedback , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[27]  Ilya V. Kolmanovsky,et al.  Predictive energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle , 2009, 2009 American Control Conference.

[28]  Daniel A. Braun,et al.  Optimal Control: When Redundancy Matters , 2007, Current Biology.

[29]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Bayesian brain : probabilistic approaches to neural coding , 2006 .

[30]  R. Carson.  Neural pathways mediating bilateral interactions between the upper limbs , 2005, Brain Research Reviews.

[31]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  An internal model for sensorimotor integration. , 1995, Science.

[32]  C. MacKenzie,et al.  Bimanual Movement Control: Information processing and Interaction Effects , 1984 .

[33]  W. Prinz,et al.  Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination , 2001, Nature.

[34]  Peter J. Beek,et al.  Laterally focused attention modulates asymmetric coupling in rhythmic interlimb coordination , 2008, Psychological research.

[35]  W. Prinz,et al.  Relationships Between Perception and Action: Current Approaches , 1990 .