Dissociating error-based and reinforcement-based loss functions during sensorimotor learning

It has been proposed that the sensorimotor system uses a loss (cost) function to evaluate potential movements in the presence of random noise. Here we test this idea in the context of both error-based and reinforcement-based learning. In a reaching task, we laterally shifted a cursor relative to true hand position using a skewed probability distribution. This skewed probability distribution had its mean and mode separated, allowing us to dissociate the optimal predictions of an error-based loss function (corresponding to the mean of the lateral shifts) and a reinforcement-based loss function (corresponding to the mode). We then examined how the sensorimotor system uses error feedback and reinforcement feedback, in isolation and combination, when deciding where to aim the hand during a reach. We found that participants compensated differently to the same skewed lateral shift distribution depending on the form of feedback they received. When provided with error feedback, participants compensated based on the mean of the skewed noise. When provided with reinforcement feedback, participants compensated based on the mode. Participants receiving both error and reinforcement feedback continued to compensate based on the mean while repeatedly missing the target, despite receiving auditory, visual and monetary reinforcement feedback that rewarded hitting the target. Our work shows that reinforcement-based and error-based learning are separable and can occur independently. Further, when error and reinforcement feedback are in conflict, the sensorimotor system heavily weights error feedback over reinforcement feedback.

[1]  M. E. Muller,et al.  A Note on the Generation of Random Normal Deviates , 1958 .

[2]  Julia Trommershäuser,et al.  Eye movements during rapid pointing under risk , 2007, Vision Research.

[3]  Alaa A. Ahmed,et al.  Reward feedback accelerates motor learning. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  J. Rothwell,et al.  The dissociable effects of punishment and reward on motor learning , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

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

[6]  R. Koenker,et al.  Asymptotic Theory of Least Absolute Error Regression , 1978 .

[7]  Jim R Potvin,et al.  Calculating individual and total muscular translational stiffness: a knee example. , 2013, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

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

[9]  Wei Ji Ma,et al.  The Size-Weight Illusion is not anti-Bayesian after all: a unifying Bayesian account , 2016, PeerJ.

[10]  Nathaniel D. Daw,et al.  Human Representation of Visuo-Motor Uncertainty as Mixtures of Orthogonal Basis Distributions , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  Nao Ninomiya,et al.  The 10th anniversary of journal of visualization , 2007, J. Vis..

[12]  Mollie K. Marko,et al.  Sensitivity to prediction error in reach adaptation. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  R C Miall,et al.  System Identification Applied to a Visuomotor Task: Near-Optimal Human Performance in a Noisy Changing Task , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[14]  Aaron R. Seitz,et al.  Rapidly learned stimulus expectations alter perception of motion. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[15]  M. Ernst,et al.  The statistical determinants of adaptation rate in human reaching. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[16]  Raymond J. Delnicki,et al.  Overcoming Motor “Forgetting” Through Reinforcement Of Learned Actions , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  R. Bakeman Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[18]  J. Algina,et al.  Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: measures of effect size for some common research designs. , 2003, Psychological methods.

[19]  Jeremy D Wong,et al.  Spatially selective enhancement of proprioceptive acuity following motor learning. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[20]  Michael S Landy,et al.  Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[21]  R. J. van Beers,et al.  What Autocorrelation Tells Us about Motor Variability: Insights from Dart Throwing , 2013, PloS one.

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

[23]  Jim R Potvin,et al.  Muscle fatigue and contraction intensity modulates the complexity of surface electromyography. , 2013, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.

[24]  M. Landy,et al.  Optimal Compensation for Changes in Task-Relevant Movement Variability , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[25]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Learning from Sensory and Reward Prediction Errors during Motor Adaptation , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[26]  Michael S Landy,et al.  Motor control is decision-making , 2012, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[27]  Jim R Potvin,et al.  On the derivation of a tensor to calculate six degree-of-freedom, musculotendon joint stiffness: implications for stability and impedance analyses. , 2013, Journal of biomechanics.

[28]  Konrad Paul Körding,et al.  The loss function of sensorimotor learning. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  K. Fujii,et al.  Visualization for the analysis of fluid motion , 2005, J. Vis..

[30]  Luigi Acerbi,et al.  On the Origins of Suboptimality in Human Probabilistic Inference , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[31]  M. Landy,et al.  Limits to human movement planning with delayed and unpredictable onset of needed information , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[32]  A. Haith,et al.  Model-based and model-free mechanisms of human motor learning. , 2013, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[33]  Raymond J. Delnicki,et al.  Persistent Residual Errors in Motor Adaptation Tasks: Reversion to Baseline and Exploratory Escape , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Paul L Gribble,et al.  Does the sensorimotor system minimize prediction error or select the most likely prediction during object lifting? , 2017, Journal of neurophysiology.

[35]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Explicit and Implicit Contributions to Learning in a Sensorimotor Adaptation Task , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[37]  Vincent S. Huang,et al.  Rethinking Motor Learning and Savings in Adaptation Paradigms: Model-Free Memory for Successful Actions Combines with Internal Models , 2011, Neuron.

[38]  Yohsuke R. Miyamoto,et al.  Temporal structure of motor variability is dynamically regulated and predicts motor learning ability , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

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

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

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

[42]  Kevin Englehart,et al.  Do Cost Functions for Tracking Error Generalize across Tasks with Different Noise Levels? , 2015, PloS one.

[43]  John A. Nelder,et al.  A Simplex Method for Function Minimization , 1965, Comput. J..

[44]  Sarah E. Pekny,et al.  Reward-Dependent Modulation of Movement Variability , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[45]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Motor variability is not noise, but grist for the learning mill , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[46]  S. Gepshtein,et al.  Optimality of human movement under natural variations of visual-motor uncertainty. , 2007, Journal of vision.

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

[48]  David J Ostry,et al.  Somatosensory Contribution to the Initial Stages of Human Motor Learning , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[49]  S. Holm A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[50]  G. Buzsáki,et al.  The log-dynamic brain: how skewed distributions affect network operations , 2014, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[51]  M. Landy,et al.  Humans Rapidly Estimate Expected Gain in Movement Planning , 2006, Psychological science.

[52]  K. McGraw,et al.  A common language effect size statistic. , 1992 .

[53]  Eli Brenner,et al.  Random walk of motor planning in task-irrelevant dimensions. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[54]  M. Landy,et al.  Dynamic Estimation of Task-Relevant Variance in Movement under Risk , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[55]  M. Landy,et al.  Statistical decision theory and trade-offs in the control of motor response. , 2003, Spatial vision.

[56]  Joshua G. A. Cashaback,et al.  The human motor system alters its reaching movement plan for task-irrelevant, positional forces. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[57]  Konrad P Kording,et al.  Saccadic suppression as a perceptual consequence of efficient sensorimotor estimation , 2017, bioRxiv.

[58]  J. Krakauer,et al.  An Implicit Plan Overrides an Explicit Strategy during Visuomotor Adaptation , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[59]  Leif Trampenau,et al.  Probabilistic information on object weight shapes force dynamics in a grip-lift task , 2015, Experimental Brain Research.

[60]  Yasmin L. Hashambhoy,et al.  Neural Correlates of Reach Errors , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.