Evidence Accumulation Account of Human Operators' Decisions in Intermittent Control During Inverted Pendulum Balancing

Human operators often employ intermittent, discontinuous control strategies in a variety of tasks. A typical intermittent controller monitors control error and generates corrective action when the deviation of the controlled system from the desired state becomes too large to ignore. Most contemporary models of human intermittent control employ simple, threshold-based trigger mechanism to model the process of control activation. However, recent experimental studies demonstrate that the control activation patterns produced by human operators do not support threshold-based models, and provide evidence for more complex activation mechanisms. In this paper, we investigate whether intermittent control activation in humans can be modeled as a decision-making process. We utilize an established drift-diffusion model, which treats decision making as an evidence accumulation process, and study it in simple numerical simulations. We demonstrate that this model robustly replicates the control activation patterns (distributions of control error at movement onset) produced by human operators in previously conducted experiments on virtual inverted pendulum balancing. Our results provide support to the hypothesis that intermittent control activation in human operators can be treated as an evidence accumulation process.

[1]  Henrik Gollee,et al.  Human control of an inverted pendulum: Is continuous control necessary? Is intermittent control effective? Is intermittent control physiological? , 2011, The Journal of physiology.

[2]  John G Milton,et al.  On-off intermittency in a human balancing task. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[3]  Ian David Loram,et al.  Human postural sway results from frequent, ballistic bias impulses by soleus and gastrocnemius , 2005, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  J. Gold,et al.  The neural basis of decision making. , 2007, Annual review of neuroscience.

[5]  Ihor Lubashevsky,et al.  Empirical basis for car-following theory development , 2003 .

[6]  M. Shadlen,et al.  Response of Neurons in the Lateral Intraparietal Area during a Combined Visual Discrimination Reaction Time Task , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[7]  E. Boer Car following from the driver’s perspective , 1999 .

[8]  Tamás Insperger,et al.  Control at stability's edge minimizes energetic costs: expert stick balancing , 2016, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[9]  S. Kelly,et al.  A supramodal accumulation-to-bound signal that determines perceptual decisions in humans , 2012, Nature Neuroscience.

[10]  Zgonnikov Arkady Example of cart velocity time series in virtual stick balancing task , 2016 .

[11]  John G. Milton,et al.  Balancing with Vibration: A Prelude for “Drift and Act” Balance Control , 2009, PloS one.

[12]  Ihor Lubashevsky,et al.  Double-well dynamics of noise-driven control activation in human intermittent control: the case of stick balancing , 2015, Cognitive Processing.

[13]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. , 2006, Psychological review.

[14]  T. Goschke,et al.  Process dynamics in delay discounting decisions: An attractor dynamics approach , 2016, Judgment and Decision Making.

[15]  John G Milton,et al.  Intermittent Motor Control: The "drift-and-act" Hypothesis. , 2013, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[16]  Yoshiyuki Asai,et al.  Learning an Intermittent Control Strategy for Postural Balancing Using an EMG-Based Human-Computer Interface , 2013, PloS one.

[17]  W. Newsome,et al.  Neural basis of a perceptual decision in the parietal cortex (area LIP) of the rhesus monkey. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[19]  Michael J. Richardson,et al.  Modeling the Dynamics of Risky Choice , 2013 .

[20]  A Zgonnikov,et al.  Decision landscapes: visualizing mouse-tracking data , 2017, Royal Society Open Science.

[21]  Peter J. Gawthrop,et al.  Intermittent control: a computational theory of human control , 2011, Biological Cybernetics.

[22]  Christian W. Eurich,et al.  Visuomotor tracking on a computer screen - an experimental paradigm to study the dynamics of motor control , 2004, Neurocomputing.

[23]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Sustained sensorimotor control as intermittent decisions about prediction errors: computational framework and application to ground vehicle steering , 2017, Biological Cybernetics.

[24]  Ihor Lubashevsky,et al.  Non-equilibrium phase transition in the model of human virtual stick balancing , 2017 .

[25]  Anthony M. Norcia,et al.  Why more is better: Simultaneous modeling of EEG, fMRI, and behavioral data , 2016, NeuroImage.

[26]  J. Collins,et al.  Open-loop and closed-loop control of posture: A random-walk analysis of center-of-pressure trajectories , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Diffusion Decision Model: Current Issues and History , 2016, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  Gustav Markkula,et al.  Modeling driver control behavior in both routine and near-accident driving , 2014 .

[29]  Ihor Lubashevsky,et al.  To react or not to react? Intrinsic stochasticity of human control in virtual stick balancing , 2014, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[30]  Ihor Lubashevsky,et al.  How the Type of Visual Feedback Affects Actions of Human operators: The Case of Virtual Stick Balancing , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.