Motor Control: In Search of Physics of the Living Systems

• Authors: Mark Latash
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This review contrasts two approaches to motor control that have dominated the field over the past years. One of them is built on ideas of the control theory; it assumes that neuronal structures perform computations and operates with notions such as motor programs and internal models. The alternative approach is based on physics and neurophysiology. It refutes the assumption of neural computations and operates with such notions as neuronal thresholds and equilibrium states. The two approaches have different goals. The former tries to produce a formal description of how any system, irrespective of its physics and physiology, can produce typical features of biological movement. This research may be very productive and important for such fields as robotics and prosthetics. The latter approach tries to produce a formal description of how neuromotor processes within the actual systems for movement production (for example, the human body) are organized to produce coordinated movements. Its goal is to turn motor control into a subfield of physics of living systems. Recent developments of the equilibrium-point hypothesis, referent configuration hypothesis, and the ideas of synergic control represent important steps towards achieving this goal.

Keywords

EN

Equilibrium-point hypothesis; referent configuration; control theory; synergy

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Journal of Human Kinetics
• Year: 2010
• Volume: 24
• Pages: 7-18

Dates

published

1 - 1 - 2010

online

21 - 6 - 2010

Contributors

author

Mark Latash

• Department of Kinesiology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA

References

• Bassin PV, Bernstein NA, Latash LP. On the problem of the relation between structure and function in the brain from a contemporary point of view. In: Grastschenkov NI (Ed.) Physiology in Clinical Practice, pp. 38-71, 1966 Nauka: Moscow (in Russian).
• Bays PM, Wolpert DM. Computational principles of sensorimotor control that minimize uncertainty and variability. Journal of Physiology 2007 578: 387-396.
• Bernstein NA. The problem of interrelation between coordination and localization. Archives of Biological Sciences 1935 38: 1-35 (in Russian).
• Bernstein NA The Co-ordination and Regulation of Movements. 1967 Pergamon Press, Oxford
• Bobath B Adult hemiplegia: evaluation and treatment. William Heinemann, London.
• Bursztyn LL, Ganesh G, Imamizu H, Kawato M, Flanagan JR. 2006 Neural correlates of internal-model loading. Current Biology 1978 16: 2440-2445.
• d'Avella A, Bizzi E. Shared and specific muscle synergies in natural motor behaviors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 2005 102: 3076-3081.[Crossref]
• Dewald JP, Pope PS, Given JD, Buchanan TS, Rymer WZ. Abnormal muscle coactivation patterns during isometric torque generation at the elbow and shoulder in hemiparetic subjects. Brain 1995 118: 495-510.
• Feldman AG. Functional tuning of the nervous system with control of movement or maintenance of a steady posture. II. Controllable parameters of the muscle. Biophysics 1966 11: 565-578
• Feldman AG. Once more on the equilibrium-point hypothesis for motor control. Journal of Motor Behavior 1986 18: 17-54.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Feldman AG. Origin and advances of the equilibrium-point hypothesis. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 2009 629: 637-644.
• Feldman AG, Levin MF. Positional frames of reference in motor control: their origin and use. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1995 18: 723-806.[Crossref]
• Feldman AG, Levin MF, Mitnitski AM, Archambault P 1998 ISEK Congress Keynote Lecture: Multi-muscle control in human movements. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 1998 8: 383-390.
• Feldman AG, Levin MF The equilibrium-point hypothesis-past, present and future. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 2009 629: 699-726.
• Feldman AG, Latash ML. Testing hypotheses and the advancement of science: Recent attempts to falsify the equilibrium-point hypothesis. Experimental Brain Research 2005 161: 91-103.
• Gelfand IM, Latash ML. On the problem of adequate language in movement science. Motor Control 1998 2: 306-313.[PubMed]
• Gelfand IM, Latash ML. On the problem of adequate language in biology. In: Latash ML (Ed.) Progress in Motor Control. vol. 2: Structure-Function Relations in Voluntary Movement. p. 209-228, Human Kinetics: 2002 Urbana, IL.
• Gelfand IM, Tsetlin ML. The non-local search principle in automatic optimization systems. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR (Proc. USSR Acad. Sci.) 1961 137: 295.
• Gelfand IM, Tsetlin ML. On certain methods of control of complex systems. Advances in Mathematical Sciences 1962 17: 103. (in Russian).
• Gelfand IM, Tsetlin ML. On mathematical modeling of the mechanisms of the central nervous system. In: Gelfand IM, Gurfinkel VS, Fomin SV, Tsetlin ML (Eds.) Models of the Structural-Functional Organization of Certain Biological Systems, pp. 9-26, Nauka: Moscow 1966 (in Russian, a translation is available in 1971 edition by MIT Press: Cambridge MA.
• Gomi H, Kawato M. (1996) Equilibrium-point hypothesis examined by measured arm stiffness during multijoint movement. Science 272: 117-120.
• Gorniak SL, Duarte M, Latash ML. Do synergies improve accuracy? A study of speed-accuracy trade-offs during finger force production. Motor Control 2008 12: 151-172.[PubMed]
• Gorniak SL, Feldman AG, Latash ML. Joint coordination during bimanual transport of real and imaginary objects. Neuroscience Letters 2009 456: 80-84.
• Gribble PL, Ostry DJ, Sanguineti V, Laboissiere R. Are complex control signals required for human arm movements? Journal of Neurophysiology 1998 79: 1409-1424.
• Houk JC. Agents of the mind. Biological Cybernetics 2005 92: 427-437.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Houk JC, Bastianen C, Fansler D, Fishbach A, Fraser D, Reber PJ, Roy SA, Simo LS. Action selection in subcortical loops through the basal ganglia and cerebellum. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society B 2007 362: 1573-1583.
• Hughlings Jackson J On the comparative stuy of disease of the nervous system. British Medical Journal 1889 355-362, Aug. 17.
• Hultborn H, Brownstone RB, Toth TI, Gossard JP Key mechanisms for setting the input-output gain across the motoneuron pool. Progress in Brain Research 2004 143:77-95.
• Imamizu H, Higuchi S, Toda A, Kawato M. Reorganization of brain activity for multiple internal models after short but intensive training. Cortex 2007 43: 338-349.
• Ivanenko YP, Poppele RE, Lacquaniti F. Five basic muscle activation patterns account for muscle activity during human locomotion. Journal of Physiology 2004 556:267-82.
• Kluzik J, Diedrichsen J, Shadmehr R, Bastian AJ. Reach adaptation: what determines whether we learn an internal model of the tool or adapt the model of our arm? Journal of Neurophysiology 2008 100: 1455-1464.
• Latash ML. Synergy. Oxford University Press: 2008a New York.
• Latash ML. Evolution of motor control: From reflexes and motor programs to the equilibrium-point hypothesis. Journal of Human Kinetics 2008b 19: 3-24.[PubMed]
• Latash ML, Aruin AS, Zatsiorsky VM. The basis of a simple synergy: Reconstruction of joint equilibrium trajectories during unrestrained arm movements. Human Movement Science 1999 18: 3-30.[Crossref]
• Latash ML, Friedman J, Kim SW, Feldman AG, Zatsiorsky VM. Prehension synergies and control with referent hand configurations. Experimental Brain Research 2010 202: 213-229.
• Latash ML, Gottlieb GL. Reconstruction of elbow joint compliant characteristics during fast and slow voluntary movements. Neuroscience 1991 43: 697-712
• Latash ML, Scholz JP, Schöner G. Toward a new theory of motor synergies. Motor Control 2007 11: 275-307.
• Latash ML, Shim JK, Smilga AV, Zatsiorsky V. A central back-coupling hypothesis on the organization of motor synergies: a physical metaphor and a neural model. Biological Cybernetics 2005 92: 186-191[Crossref][PubMed]
• Ostry DJ, Feldman AG. A critical evaluation of the force control hypothesis in motor control. Experimental Brain Research 2003 153: 275-288.
• Pilon J-F, De Serres SJ, Feldman AG. Threshold position control of arm movement with anticipatory increase in grip force. Experimental Brain Research 2007 181: 49-67
• Schmidt RA. A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Reviews 1975 82: 225-260.
• Schmidt RA. Past and future issues in motor programming. Research Quarterly of Exercise and Sport 1980 51: 122-140.
• Shadmehr R, Wise SP. The computational neurobiology of reaching and pointing. MIT Press: 2005 Cambridge, MA.
• Scholz JP, Schöner G. The uncontrolled manifold concept: Identifying control variables for a functional task. Experimental Brain Research 1999 126, 289-306.
• Shapkova EYu, Shapkova AL, Goodman SR, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML. Do synergies decrease force variability? A study of single-finger and multi-finger force production. Experimental Brain Research 2008 188: 411-425.
• Shim JK, Olafsdottir H, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML. The emergence and disappearance of multi-digit synergies during force production tasks. Experimental Brain Research 2005 164: 260-270.
• Ting LH, Macpherson JM. A limited set of muscle synergies for force control during a postural task. Journal of Neurophysiology 2005 93: 609-613.[PubMed]
• Todorov E. Optimality principles in sensorimotor control. Nature Neuroscience 2004 7: 907-915.
• Todorov E, Jordan MI. Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination. Nature Neuroscience 2002 5: 1226-1235.
• Tresch MC and Jarc A The case for and against muscle synergies. Current Opinions in Neurobiology 2009 19: 601-607.
• Winter DA, Prince F, Frank JS, Powell C, Zabjek KF. Unified theory regarding A/P and M/L balance in quiet stance. Journal of Neurophysiology 1996 75: 2334-2343.
• Zhang W, Scholz JP, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML. What do synergies do? Effects of secondary constraints on multidigit synergies in accurate force-production tasks. Journal of Neurophysiology 2008 99: 500-513.
• Zhang W, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML. Accurate production of time-varying patterns of the moment of force in multi-finger tasks. Experimental Brain Research 2006 175: 68-82.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10078-010-0015-4