Are arm trajectories planned in kinematic or dynamic coordinates? An adaptation study

There are several invariant features of pointto-point human arm movements: trajectories tend to be straight, smooth, and have bell-shaped velocity profiles. One approach to accounting for these data is via optimization theory; a movement is specified implicitly as the optimum of a cost function, e.g., integrated jerk or torque change. Optimization models of trajectory planning, as well as models not phrased in the optimization framework, generally fall into two main groups-those specified in kinematic coordinates and those specified in dynamic coordinates. To distinguish between these two possibilities we have studied the effects of artificial visual feedback on planar two-joint arm movements. During self-paced point-to-point arm movements the visual feedback of hand position was altered so as to increase the perceived curvature of the movement. The perturbation was zero at both ends of the movement and reached a maximum at the midpoint of the movement. Cost functions specified by hand coordinate kinematics predict adaptation to increased curvature so as to reduce the visual curvature, while dynamically specified cost functions predict no adaptation in the underlying trajectory planner, provided the final goal of the movement can still be achieved. We also studied the effects of reducing the perceived curvature in transverse movements, which are normally slightly curved. Adaptation should be seen in this condition only if the desired trajectory is both specified in kinematic coordinates and actually curved. Increasing the perceived curvature of normally straight sagittal movements led to significant (P<0.001) corrective adaptation in the curvature of the actual hand movement; the hand movement became curved, thereby reducing the visually perceived curvature. Increasing the curvature of the normally curved transverse movements produced a significant (P<0.01) corrective adaptation; the hand movement became straighter, thereby again reducing the visually perceived curvature. When the curvature of naturally curved transverse movements was reduced, there was no significant adaptation (P>0.05). The results of the curvature-increasing study suggest that trajectories are planned in visually based kinematic coordinates. The results of the curvature-reducing study suggest that the desired trajectory is straight in visual space. These results are incompatible with purely dynamicbased models such as the minimum torque change model. We suggest that spatial perception-as mediated by vision-plays a fundamental role in trajectory planning.

[1]  Hermann von Helmholtz,et al.  Treatise on Physiological Optics , 1962 .

[2]  R. Held,et al.  Adaptation to displaced and delayed visual feedback from the hand. , 1966 .

[3]  N. A. Bernshteĭn The co-ordination and regulation of movements , 1967 .

[4]  Arthur E. Bryson,et al.  Applied Optimal Control , 1969 .

[5]  E. Bizzi,et al.  Mechanisms underlying achievement of final head position. , 1976, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  W. Cleveland Robust Locally Weighted Regression and Smoothing Scatterplots , 1979 .

[7]  D Goodman,et al.  On the nature of human interlimb coordination. , 1979, Science.

[8]  J. M. Foley Binocular distance perception. , 1980, Psychological review.

[9]  E. Bizzi,et al.  Human arm trajectory formation. , 1982, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[10]  E. Bizzi,et al.  Posture control and trajectory formation during arm movement , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[11]  N. Hogan An organizing principle for a class of voluntary movements , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[12]  T. Flash,et al.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

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

[14]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Handbook of perception and human performance , 1986 .

[15]  W. Thomas Miller,et al.  Sensor-based control of robotic manipulators using a general learning algorithm , 1987, IEEE J. Robotics Autom..

[16]  宇野 洋二,et al.  Formation and control of optimal trajectory in human multijoint arm movement : minimum torque-change model , 1988 .

[17]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of planned arm movements: emergent invariants and speed-accuracy properties during trajectory formation. , 1988, Psychological review.

[18]  M Kuperstein,et al.  Neural model of adaptive hand-eye coordination for single postures. , 1988, Science.

[19]  H. Cunningham Aiming error under transformed spatial mappings suggests a structure for visual-motor maps. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  Mitsuo Kawato,et al.  Feedback-Error-Learning Neural Network for Supervised Motor Learning , 1990 .

[21]  C Ghez,et al.  Roles of proprioceptive input in the programming of arm trajectories. , 1990, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[22]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Forward Models: Supervised Learning with a Distal Teacher , 1992, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  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.

[24]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  A Model of the Learning of Arm Trajectories from Spatial Deviations , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[25]  M. Kawato,et al.  Formation and control of optimal trajectory in human multijoint arm movement , 1989, Biological Cybernetics.

[26]  J. M. Hollerbach,et al.  Deducing planning variables from experimental arm trajectories: Pitfalls and possibilities , 1987, Biological Cybernetics.

[27]  P. Morasso Spatial control of arm movements , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[28]  Z. Hasan,et al.  Optimized movement trajectories and joint stiffness in unperturbed, inertially loaded movements , 1986, Biological Cybernetics.

[29]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Perceptual distortion contributes to the curvature of human reaching movements , 1994, Experimental Brain Research.

[30]  L. Jakobson,et al.  Trajectories of reaches to prismatically-displaced targets: evidence for “automatic” visuomotor recalibration , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  T. Flash,et al.  The control of hand equilibrium trajectories in multi-joint arm movements , 1987, Biological Cybernetics.

[32]  W. L. Nelson Physical principles for economies of skilled movements , 1983, Biological Cybernetics.

[33]  Masazumi Katayama,et al.  Virtual trajectory and stiffness ellipse during multijoint arm movement predicted by neural inverse models , 1993, Biological Cybernetics.

[34]  J. Hollerbach,et al.  Time-varying stiffness of human elbow joint during cyclic voluntary movement , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.