Evaluation of a mixed controller that amplifies spatial errors while reducing timing errors

Previous results suggest that haptic guidance enhances learning of the timing components of motor tasks, whereas error amplification is better for learning the spatial components. In this paper we evaluate a novel mixed guidance controller that combines haptic guidance and error amplification to simultaneously promote learning of the timing and spatial components. The controller is realized using a saddle-like force field around the desired movement position. This force field has a stable manifold tangential to the trajectory that guides subjects in velocity related aspects. The force field has its unstable manifold perpendicular to the trajectory, which amplifies the normal (spatial) error. We conducted an experiment with twenty nine healthy subjects to test whether training with the mixed guidance controller resulted in better learning than training without guidance or with guidance-as-needed. Subjects trained two tasks: a continuous rhythmic task (circle) and a continuous single task (line). We found that the effectiveness of the training strategy depended on the task. Training with mixed guidance was especially beneficial for learning the timing components of the line, but limited learning of the circle. Perhaps the continuous change in the force directions during training of the circle was too difficult to interpret.

[1]  David J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Haptic Guidance Can Enhance Motor Learning of a Steering Task , 2008, Journal of motor behavior.

[2]  Martin A. Giese,et al.  Morphable Models for the Analysis and Synthesis of Complex Motion Patterns , 2000, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[3]  D. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Human-robot cooperative movement training: Learning a novel sensory motor transformation during walking with robotic assistance-as-needed , 2007, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[4]  R. Riener,et al.  Learning a locomotor task: with or without errors? , 2014, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[5]  R. Schmidt,et al.  Knowledge of results and motor learning: a review and critical reappraisal. , 1984, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  Robert Riener,et al.  ARMin III --arm therapy exoskeleton with an ergonomic shoulder actuation , 2009 .

[7]  David J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Comparison of error-amplification and haptic-guidance training techniques for learning of a timing-based motor task by healthy individuals , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[8]  Peter Wolf,et al.  The role of skill level and motor task characteristics on the effectiveness of robotic training: first results , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR).

[9]  D. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury , 2009, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[10]  Jaime E. Duarte,et al.  Effects of robotically modulating kinematic variability on motor skill learning and motivation. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[11]  Robert Riener,et al.  Towards more efficient robotic gait training: A novel controller to modulate movement errors , 2016, 2016 6th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob).

[12]  S. Coquillart,et al.  Haptic Guidance Improves the Visuo-Manual Tracking of Trajectories , 2008, PloS one.

[13]  Robert Riener,et al.  A robotic system to train activities of daily living in a virtual environment , 2011, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[14]  J. Patton,et al.  Evaluation of robotic training forces that either enhance or reduce error in chronic hemiparetic stroke survivors , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  Herbert Heuer,et al.  The influence of haptic guidance on the production of spatio-temporal patterns. , 2012, Human movement science.

[16]  V. Dietz,et al.  Three-dimensional, task-specific robot therapy of the arm after stroke: a multicentre, parallel-group randomised trial , 2014, The Lancet Neurology.