Biomedical subjects

A Karniel

Publications and source records attributed to A Karniel.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2002

Does the motor control system use multiple models and context switching to cope with a variable environment?

Studies of arm movements have shown that subjects learn to compensate predictable mechanical perturbations by developing a representation of the relation between the state of motion of the arm and the perturbing forces. Here, we tested the hypothesis that subjects construct internal representations of two different force fields and switch between them when presented with an alternating sequence of these fields. Our results do not support this hypothesis. Subjects performed reaching movements in four sessions over 4 days. On the 1st day the robotic manipulandum perturbed the movement by perpendicular force that alternated its direction after each movement. Subjects were unable to construct the two underlying models and switch between them. On the 2nd day only one field was applied and well learned. On the 3rd day only the other field was applied and well learned. Then the experiment of the 1st day was repeated on the 4th day. Even after this extensive training subjects showed no signs of improved performance with alternating fields. This result combined with previous studies suggests that the central nervous system has a strong tendency to employ a single internal model when dealing with a sequence of perturbations.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

PubMed2002

Three creatures named 'forward model'.

It has recently been suggested that the nervous system employs forward models for the purpose of motor control. The evidence for this hypothetical computational structure comes from various sources, theoretical and experimental. The purpose of this commentary is to distinguish between three different structures that are used to support the forward model hypothesis: (1) output predictor, (2) state estimator, and (3) distal teacher. It is possible that the brain employs all these structures for control. However, the general term forward model could be misleading since evidence for one structure could be misinterpreted as supporting evidence for the other structures.

Neural Networks, Computer↗

PubMed2001

Best estimated inverse versus inverse of the best estimator.

The construction of a feed-forward controller frequently requires the estimation of an inverse function. Two possible methods to achieve this are: (i) learning the best estimated inverse (BEI), a method that is sometimes referred to as direct inverse learning and (ii) learning the inverse of the best estimator (IBE), a method that is sometimes referred to as indirect inverse learning. We analyze a general control problem, in the presence of noise, and show analytically that these two methods are asymptotically significantly different, even for simple linear non-redundant systems. We further demonstrate that the IBE method is typically superior for control purposes.

Artifacts↗

PubMed1997

A model for learning human reaching movements.

Reaching movement is a fast movement towards a given target. The main characteristics of such a movement are straight path and a bell-shaped speed profile. In this work a mathematical model for the control of the human arm during ballistic reaching movements is presented. The model of the arm contains a 2 degrees of freedom planar manipulator, and a Hill-type, non-linear mechanical model of six muscles. The arm model is taken from the literature with minor changes. The nervous system is modeled as an adjustable pattern generator that creates the control signals to the muscles. The control signals in this model are rectangular pulses activated at various amplitudes and timings, that are determined according to the given target. These amplitudes and timings are the parameters that should be related to each target and initial conditions in the work-space. The model of the nervous system consists of an artificial neural net that maps any given target to the parameter space of the pattern generator. In order to train this net, the nervous system model includes a sensitivity model that transforms the error from the arm end-point coordinates to the parameter coordinates. The error is assessed only at the termination of the movement from knowledge of the results. The role of the non-linearity in the muscle model and the performance of the learning scheme are analysed, illustrated in simulations and discussed. The results of the present study demonstrate the central nervous system's (CNS) ability to generate typical reaching movements with a simple feedforward controller that controls only the timing and amplitude of rectangular excitation pulses to the muscles and adjusts these parameters based on knowledge of the results. In this scheme, which is based on the adjustment of only a few parameters instead of the whole trajectory, the dimension of the control problem is reduced significantly. It is shown that the non-linear properties of the muscles are essential to achieve this simple control. This conclusion agrees with the general concept that motor control is the result of an interaction between the nervous system and the musculoskeletal dynamics.

Algorithms↗