A Single-Rate Context-Dependent Learning Process Underlies Rapid Adaptation to Familiar Object Dynamics

Motor learning has been extensively studied using dynamic (force-field) perturbations. These induce movement errors that result in adaptive changes to the motor commands. Several state-space models have been developed to explain how trial-by-trial errors drive the progressive adaptation observed in such studies. These models have been applied to adaptation involving novel dynamics, which typically occurs over tens to hundreds of trials, and which appears to be mediated by a dual-rate adaptation process. In contrast, when manipulating objects with familiar dynamics, subjects adapt rapidly within a few trials. Here, we apply state-space models to familiar dynamics, asking whether adaptation is mediated by a single-rate or dual-rate process. Previously, we reported a task in which subjects rotate an object with known dynamics. By presenting the object at different visual orientations, adaptation was shown to be context-specific, with limited generalization to novel orientations. Here we show that a multiple-context state-space model, with a generalization function tuned to visual object orientation, can reproduce the time-course of adaptation and de-adaptation as well as the observed context-dependent behavior. In contrast to the dual-rate process associated with novel dynamics, we show that a single-rate process mediates adaptation to familiar object dynamics. The model predicts that during exposure to the object across multiple orientations, there will be a degree of independence for adaptation and de-adaptation within each context, and that the states associated with all contexts will slowly de-adapt during exposure in one particular context. We confirm these predictions in two new experiments. Results of the current study thus highlight similarities and differences in the processes engaged during exposure to novel versus familiar dynamics. In both cases, adaptation is mediated by multiple context-specific representations. In the case of familiar object dynamics, however, the representations can be engaged based on visual context, and are updated by a single-rate process.

[1]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Context-dependent partitioning of motor learning in bimanual movements. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[2]  H. Gomi,et al.  Task-Dependent Viscoelasticity of Human Multijoint Arm and Its Spatial Characteristics for Interaction with Environments , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  Daniel M Wolpert,et al.  Kinematics and Dynamics Are Not Represented Independently in Motor Working Memory: Evidence from an Interference Study , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  P. R. Davidson,et al.  Scaling down motor memories: de-adaptation after motor learning , 2004, Neuroscience Letters.

[5]  R. Johansson,et al.  Coordinated isometric muscle commands adequately and erroneously programmed for the weight during lifting task with precision grip , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[6]  Stephen H Scott,et al.  Limited transfer of learning between unimanual and bimanual skills within the same limb , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[7]  David J Ostry,et al.  Transfer of Motor Learning across Arm Configurations , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  Daniel A. Braun,et al.  Optimal Control Predicts Human Performance on Objects with Internal Degrees of Freedom , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[9]  Joachim Hermsdörfer,et al.  Formation and decay of sensorimotor and associative memory in object lifting , 2007, European Journal of Applied Physiology.

[10]  John W. Krakauer,et al.  Independent learning of internal models for kinematic and dynamic control of reaching , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Explaining savings for visuomotor adaptation: linear time-invariant state-space models are not sufficient. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[12]  M. Kawato,et al.  Neural Correlates of Predictive and Postdictive Switching Mechanisms for Internal Models , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[13]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Multiple Grasp-Specific Representations of Tool Dynamics Mediate Skillful Manipulation , 2010, Current Biology.

[14]  Daniel M Wolpert,et al.  Spatial representation of predictive motor learning. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  T. Milner,et al.  Adaptive control of stiffness to stabilize hand position with large loads , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[16]  M. Kawato,et al.  Explicit contextual information selectively contributes to predictive switching of internal models , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[17]  M. Santello,et al.  Anticipatory Planning and Control of Grasp Positions and Forces for Dexterous Two-Digit Manipulation , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  Otmar Bock,et al.  Conditions for interference versus facilitation during sequential sensorimotor adaptation , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Adaptation to Visuomotor Transformations: Consolidation, Interference, and Forgetting , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[20]  R Shadmehr,et al.  Time-dependent motor memory processes in amnesic subjects. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  Christopher D Mah,et al.  Manipulating objects with internal degrees of freedom: evidence for model-based control. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

[22]  O. Bock Load compensation in human goal-directed arm movements , 1990, Behavioural Brain Research.

[23]  J. Flanagan,et al.  Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size–weight illusion , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[24]  N. Schweighofer,et al.  Dual Adaptation Supports a Parallel Architecture of Motor Memory , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[25]  D M Wolpert,et al.  Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control , 1998, Neural Networks.

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

[27]  Daniel A. Braun,et al.  Structure learning in action , 2010, Behavioural Brain Research.

[28]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Quantifying Generalization from Trial-by-Trial Behavior of Adaptive Systems that Learn with Basis Functions: Theory and Experiments in Human Motor Control , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  J. Lackner,et al.  Motor control and learning in altered dynamic environments , 2005, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[30]  J Randall Flanagan,et al.  Visuomotor rotations of varying size and direction compete for a single internal model in motor working memory. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  Marco Santello,et al.  Manipulation after object rotation reveals independent sensorimotor memory representations of digit positions and forces. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[32]  S. Scott,et al.  Multi-compartment model can explain partial transfer of learning within the same limb between unimanual and bimanual reaching , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[33]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Learning of action through adaptive combination of motor primitives , 2000, Nature.

[34]  J R Flanagan,et al.  The Role of Internal Models in Motion Planning and Control: Evidence from Grip Force Adjustments during Movements of Hand-Held Loads , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[35]  Daniel M. Wolpert,et al.  A modular planar robotic manipulandum with end-point torque control , 2009, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[36]  L. M. M.-T. Theory of Probability , 1929, Nature.

[37]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Naturalistic approaches to sensorimotor control. , 2011, Progress in brain research.

[38]  Mitsuo Kawato,et al.  MOSAIC Model for Sensorimotor Learning and Control , 2001, Neural Computation.

[39]  J. Flanagan,et al.  Sensorimotor memory of weight asymmetry in object manipulation , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[40]  F. Lacquaniti,et al.  Some factors pertinent to the organization and control of arm movements , 1982, Brain Research.

[41]  John W Krakauer,et al.  Adaptation to visuomotor rotation through interaction between posterior parietal and motor cortical areas. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[42]  I Salimi,et al.  Specificity of internal representations underlying grasping. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[43]  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.

[44]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Simultaneous bimanual dynamics are learned without interference , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[45]  A. G. Witney,et al.  Learning and decay of prediction in object manipulation. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[46]  Ian S Howard,et al.  Composition and Decomposition in Bimanual Dynamic Learning , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[47]  K. J. Cole,et al.  Memory representations underlying motor commands used during manipulation of common and novel objects. , 1993, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[49]  R A Scheidt,et al.  Persistence of motor adaptation during constrained, multi-joint, arm movements. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[50]  Daniel B. Willingham,et al.  Patterns of interference in sequence learning and prism adaptation inconsistent with the consolidation hypothesis. , 2002, Learning & memory.

[51]  C. Atkeson,et al.  Kinematic features of unrestrained vertical arm movements , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

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

[53]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Failure to Consolidate the Consolidation Theory of Learning for Sensorimotor Adaptation Tasks , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[55]  E Bizzi,et al.  Motor learning by field approximation. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[56]  F. A. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Does the motor control system use multiple models and context switching to cope with a variable environment? , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.