Motor prediction Current Biology

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
(Example) Class Presentation: John Desmond
Advertisements

2015 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures Alzheimer's & Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer's Association Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages (March.
Magazine R729 Primer Motor prediction Daniel M. Wolpert* and J. Randall Flanagan † The concept of motor prediction was first considered by Helmholtz when.
From: How the unstable eye sees a stable and moving world
Cell Turnover: Flexible Coupling Meets the Needs of Development
Building Better Models of Visual Cortical Receptive Fields
Piercing of Consciousness as a Threshold-Crossing Operation
Visual Perception: Shaping What We See
Gemmata obscuriglobus
Multisensory Integration: What You See Is Where You Hear
Mackenzie Weygandt Mathis, Alexander Mathis, Naoshige Uchida  Neuron 
Brain Plasticity: When the Feet and Mouth Replace the Hand
Time perception: Brain time or event time?
Context-Dependent Decay of Motor Memories during Skill Acquisition
Volume 13, Issue 14, Pages (July 2003)
Cursive Writing with Smooth Pursuit Eye Movements
Volume 19, Issue 22, Pages R1022-R1023 (December 2009)
Theta Rhythm: Temporal Glue for Episodic Memory
Toward More Versatile and Intuitive Cortical Brain–Machine Interfaces
Volume 20, Issue 10, Pages R431-R435 (May 2010)
Volume 21, Issue 23, Pages R941-R945 (December 2011)
Aaron R. Seitz, Praveen K. Pilly, Christopher C. Pack  Current Biology 
Prediction of protein structure
When Feeling Is More Important Than Seeing in Sensorimotor Adaptation
Molecular Evolution: Introns Fall into Place
Volume 21, Issue 20, Pages R837-R838 (October 2011)
Volume 21, Issue 19, Pages (October 2011)
C.-A. Ewaldsson, R.G. Hahn  British Journal of Anaesthesia 
Intermediate Filaments: Vimentin Moves in
Multisensory Integration: What You See Is Where You Hear
Behavioural Genetics: Evolutionary Fingerprint of the ‘Invisible Hand’
Visual Attention: Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down
Calcium Signalling: Calcium Goes Global
A Code for Cross-Modal Working Memory
Context-Dependent Decay of Motor Memories during Skill Acquisition
Antarctic sea ice losses drive gains in benthic carbon drawdown
Motion-Based Analysis of Spatial Patterns by the Human Visual System
Cortical Processing: How Mice Predict the Visual Effects of Locomotion
Bacterial conjugation: Running rings around DNA
Motor learning Current Biology
Audiovisual Integration of Letters in the Human Brain
Franco Pestilli, Marisa Carrasco, David J. Heeger, Justin L. Gardner 
Neurological and Robot-Controlled Induction of an Apparition
Sense of agency Current Biology
Plant Stem Cells Current Biology
Elementary motion detectors
Vision: The World through Picket Fences
Insect Vision: Controlling Actions through Optic Flow
Franco Pestilli, Marisa Carrasco, David J. Heeger, Justin L. Gardner 
Daniel Hanus, Josep Call  Current Biology 
Tickling Current Biology
Shin'ya Nishida, Alan Johnston  Current Biology 
Time perception: Brain time or event time?
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages (February 2017)
Active Interpersonal Touch Gives Rise to the Social Softness Illusion
Sébastien Marti, Jean-Rémi King, Stanislas Dehaene  Neuron 
Telomeres: The Molecular Events Driving End-To-End Fusions
Motor Planning, Not Execution, Separates Motor Memories
Neurophysiology: Are autapses prodigal synapses?
Volume 7, Issue 6, Pages R147-R151 (June 2000)
Visual selection: Neurons that make up their minds
Postural Control: Learning to Balance Is a Question of Timing
Sensory processing: Signal selection by cortical feedback
Circadian rhythms: Something to cry about?
Volume 19, Issue 9, Pages R353-R355 (May 2009)
Volume 23, Issue 21, Pages (November 2013)
Sensory Neurophysiology: Motion Vision during Motor Action
Visual Motion Induces a Forward Prediction of Spatial Pattern
James N. Ingram, Ian S. Howard, J. Randall Flanagan, Daniel M. Wolpert 
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages (January 2010)
Presentation transcript:

Motor prediction Current Biology Daniel M Wolpert, J.Randall Flanagan  Current Biology  Volume 11, Issue 18, Pages R729-R732 (September 2001) DOI: 10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00432-8

Fig. 1 To prevent a ketchup bottle from slipping, sufficient grip force must be exerted to counteract the load. When the load is increased in a self-generated manner (left hand strikes the ketchup bottle, top), a predictor can use an efference copy of the motor command to anticipate the upcoming load force and thereby generate grip which parallels load force with no delay. However, when the load is externally generated (another person strikes the bottle, bottom), then it cannot be accurately predicted. As a consequence, the grip force lags behind the load force and the baseline grip force is increased to compensate and prevent slippage. Current Biology 2001 11, R729-R732DOI: (10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00432-8)

Fig. 2 An experiment in which subjects tickle themselves through a robotic interface (not shown). In the top Figure the motion of the right hand is directly transmitted to the left. Using a predictor the sensory consequences of this motion are estimated and subtracted from the actual sensory feedback leaving little discrepancy. In the lower Figure a time delay was introduced between the motion of the right hand and the effect on the left. The motion of the right hand and stimulus on the left hand is the same as in the upper figure. However, the temporal rearrangement between cause and effect means that the prediction is out of synchronisation with the actual feedback, leading to a large sensory discrepancy which is felt as tickle. Current Biology 2001 11, R729-R732DOI: (10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00432-8)

Fig. 3 A schematic of context estimation with just two contexts, that a teapot is empty or full. When a motor command is generated, an efference copy of the motor command is used to simulate the sensory consequences under the two possible contexts. The predictions based on an empty teapot suggest that lift-off will take place early compared to the full teapot context and that the lift will be higher. These predictions are compared with actual feedback. As the teapot is in fact empty, the sensory feedback matches the predictions of the empty teapot context. This leads to a high likelihood for the empty teapot and a low likelihood for the full teapot. Current Biology 2001 11, R729-R732DOI: (10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00432-8)