Quantifying Generalization from Trial-by-Trial Behavior in Reaching Movement Dan Liu Natural Computation Group Cognitive Science Department, UCSD March,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Visual feedback in the control of reaching movements David Knill and Jeff Saunders.
Advertisements

Basis Functions. What’s a basis ? Can be used to describe any point in space. e.g. the common Euclidian basis (x, y, z) forms a basis according to which.
Recognizing Human Actions by Attributes CVPR2011 Jingen Liu, Benjamin Kuipers, Silvio Savarese Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science University.
Mutidimensional Data Analysis Growth of big databases requires important data processing.  Need for having methods allowing to extract this information.
Higher Coordination with Less Control – A Result of Information Maximization in the Sensorimotor Loop Keyan Zahedi, Nihat Ay, Ralf Der (Published on: May.
Neural Network Approach to Modeling the Laser Material-Removal Process By Basem. F. Yousef London, Canada, N6A 5B9 December 2001.
Hybrid Position-Based Visual Servoing
Kinetic Rules Underlying Multi-Joint Reaching Movements. Daniel M Corcos†, James S. Thomas*, and Ziaul Hasan†. School of Physical Therapy*, Ohio University,
Inferring Hand Motion from Multi-Cell Recordings in Motor Cortex using a Kalman Filter Wei Wu*, Michael Black †, Yun Gao*, Elie Bienenstock* §, Mijail.
On Constrained Optimization Approach To Object Segmentation Chia Han, Xun Wang, Feng Gao, Zhigang Peng, Xiaokun Li, Lei He, William Wee Artificial Intelligence.
Dec, 2003 Amir Karniel Jerusalem in Motion Feedback, Adaptation, Learning or Evolution: How Does the Brain Coordinate and Time Movements? Amir Karniel.
SES 2007 A Multiresolution Approach for Statistical Mobility Prediction of Unmanned Ground Vehicles 44 th Annual Technical Meeting of the Society of Engineering.
The City College of New York 1 Jizhong Xiao Department of Electrical Engineering City College of New York Manipulator Control Introduction.
1 Hybrid Agent-Based Modeling: Architectures,Analyses and Applications (Stage One) Li, Hailin.
Single Point of Contact Manipulation of Unknown Objects Stuart Anderson Advisor: Reid Simmons School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University.
Near-Optimal Decision-Making in Dynamic Environments Manu Chhabra 1 Robert Jacobs 2 1 Department of Computer Science 2 Department of Brain & Cognitive.
Hand Signals Recognition from Video Using 3D Motion Capture Archive Tai-Peng Tian Stan Sclaroff Computer Science Department B OSTON U NIVERSITY I. Introduction.
Introduction to ROBOTICS
Velocities and Static Force
© 2011 Autodesk Freely licensed for use by educational institutions. Reuse and changes require a note indicating that content has been modified from the.
1 Evaluation and Modeling of Learning Effects on Control of Skilled Movements through Impedance Regulation and Model Predictive Control By: Mohammad Darainy.
A kinematic cost Reza Shadmehr. Subject’s performanceMinimum jerk motion Flash and Hogan, J Neurosci 1985 Point to point movements generally exhibit similar.
15/09/2015handout 31 Robot Kinematics Logics of presentation: Kinematics: what Coordinate system: way to describe motion Relation between two coordinate.
20/10/2009 IVR Herrmann IVR: Introduction to Control OVERVIEW Control systems Transformations Simple control algorithms.
INVERSE KINEMATICS ANALYSIS TRAJECTORY PLANNING FOR A ROBOT ARM Proceedings of th Asian Control Conference Kaohsiung, Taiwan, May 15-18, 2011 Guo-Shing.
STUDY, MODEL & INTERFACE WITH MOTOR CORTEX Presented by - Waseem Khatri.
MAE505: Robotics Final Project – Papers Review. Presented By: Tao Gan Advisor: Dr. Venkat Krovi. Main Topic: Nonholonomic-Wheel Mobile Robot (WMR). Sub-Topics:
Yaomin Jin Design of Experiments Morris Method.
Optimal Therapy After Stroke: Insights from a Computational Model Cheol Han June 12, 2007.
Homework: optimal control without a reference trajectory A disadvantage of the formulation that we developed in class is that it requires a reference trajectory.
The effect of varying the visual context on trajectory planning and perceptual awareness of one’s own performance 1 Psychology and Neurocognition Laboratory.
Baseline parameters are treated as normally distributed, first POST parameters as uniformly distributed samples, with variance [2]: Variations in the kinematics.
Dr. Wang Xingbo Fall , 2005 Mathematical & Mechanical Method in Mechanical Engineering.
Introduction to ROBOTICS
Reinforcement Learning Control with Robust Stability Chuck Anderson, Matt Kretchmar, Department of Computer Science, Peter Young, Department of Electrical.
Motor Control. Beyond babbling Three problems with motor babbling: –Random exploration is slow –Error-based learning algorithms are faster but error signals.
Dr. Amr Khairat Radi Department of Physics Faculty of Science Ain Shams University Cairo, Egypt
Accurate Robot Positioning using Corrective Learning Ram Subramanian ECE 539 Course Project Fall 2003.
Control and Synchronization of Chaos Li-Qun Chen Department of Mechanics, Shanghai University Shanghai Institute of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics Shanghai.
City College of New York 1 John (Jizhong) Xiao Department of Electrical Engineering City College of New York Mobile Robot Control G3300:
Simulation and Experimental Verification of Model Based Opto-Electronic Automation Drexel University Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
MURI High- Level Control Biomimetic Robots - ONR Site Visit - August 9, 2000 Human Computational Modeling PurposePurpose: to understand arm impedance.
MURI High-Level Control Biomimetic Robots - ONR Site Visit - August 9, Fabrication MURI Low-Level Control High-Level Control What strategies are.
Landscape Animation Summary of an experimental approach to inform the use of camera dynamics in visualization.
Dr. Wang Xingbo QQ: Homepage: wxbstudio.home4u.china.com Fall , 2005 Mathematical & Mechanical Method in Mechanical.
Deep Learning Overview Sources: workshop-tutorial-final.pdf
Separate Contributions of Kinematic and Kinetic Errors to Trajectory and Grip Force Adaptation When Transporting Novel Hand-Held Loads Frederic Danion,1*
Summary of points for WS04 – from Weiss & Jeannerod (1998)
MAE505: Robotics Final Project – Papers Review.
Accurate Robot Positioning using Corrective Learning
A. Melendez-Calderon, L. Masia, R. Gassert, G. Sandini, E. Burdet
Zaid H. Rashid Supervisor Dr. Hassan M. Alwan
Ch 14. Active Vision for Goal-Oriented Humanoid Robot Walking (1/2) Creating Brain-Like Intelligence, Sendhoff et al. (eds), Robots Learning from.
LOCATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF DAMPING PARAMETERS
Digital Control Systems (DCS)
Context-Dependent Decay of Motor Memories during Skill Acquisition
Signal, Noise, and Variation in Neural and Sensory-Motor Latency
Ian S. Howard, Daniel M. Wolpert, David W. Franklin  Current Biology 
Ian S. Howard, Daniel M. Wolpert, David W. Franklin  Current Biology 
Context-Dependent Decay of Motor Memories during Skill Acquisition
Neuronal Correlates of Motor Performance and Motor Learning in the Primary Motor Cortex of Monkeys Adapting to an External Force Field  Chiang-Shan Ray.
Motor Learning with Unstable Neural Representations
Vivek R. Athalye, Karunesh Ganguly, Rui M. Costa, Jose M. Carmena 
The Organization and Planning of Movement Ch
Learning Theory Reza Shadmehr
Computer Use Changes Generalization of Movement Learning
Motor Planning, Not Execution, Separates Motor Memories
Stan Van Pelt and W. Pieter Medendorp
JJ Orban de Xivry Hands on session JJ Orban de Xivry
Matthis Synofzik, Axel Lindner, Peter Thier  Current Biology 
Presentation transcript:

Quantifying Generalization from Trial-by-Trial Behavior in Reaching Movement Dan Liu Natural Computation Group Cognitive Science Department, UCSD March, 2004

REFERENCE Shadmehr R, Mussa-Ivaldi FA (1994). Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task, Journal of Neuroscience 14: Donchin O, Francis JT, Shadmehr R (2003). Quantifying generalization from trial-by-trial behavior of adaptive systems that learn with basis functions: theory and experiments in human motor control. Journal of Neuroscience, 23:

OUTLINE Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning A Model for Adaptation during Motor Learning Evaluation of the Model Conclusion and Discussion

Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning Basic Idea: trial-by-trial approach How a subject adapted to the changed dynamics of a reaching task. Materials and Methods Experiment on Adaptation to the Force Field

Experimental Setup Fig1. Experimental setup. A and B, experimental setup and the coordinate system for simulations of human arm and robot arm dynamics. C and D, force field examined. C, force filed is a function of velocity of hand (invariant in end-point coordinates).

Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning Basic Idea Materials and Methods Experiment on Adaptation to the Force Field Experiment on Adaptation to the Force Field  Adaptation Process  Aftereffects

Adaptation Process Fig 2. Trajectory and velocity during adaptation in force field 1. Trajectory rows show the average +- SD of hand trajectories during the first to final 250 targets. Velocity rows show the tangential hand velocities. Column A is in non force field, column B is upon initial exposure to the force field, and column C is after 1000 reaching movements in the force field. Trajectory Velocity Conclusion: The recovery of the original unperturbed response constitutes a clear example of an adaptive behavior.

Aftereffects Conclusion: Subject developed an internal model during adaptation, which is a mapping from the arm’s motion into force. Fig3. Aftereffects of adaptation to the force field. A-D, averages +-SD of the hand trajectories while moving in a null field during the training period for the first to final 250 targets. F, averages +-SD of the hand trajectories upon initial exposure to the force field. Subject generalized the internal modal broadly outside the workspace explored during adaptation. V.S. force field: Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 non force field: A B C D non force field: Set 1 Set 4 force field: F

Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning Conclusion:  During adaptation to a force field that significantly changes the dynamics of a reaching movement, the CNS forms an internal model of the added dynamics.  This internal model has the power to generalize well beyond the training region. Question: How to model this generalization process?

OUTLINE Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning A Model for Adaptation during Motor Learning A Model for Adaptation during Motor Learning Evaluation of the Model Conclusion and Discussion

A Model for Adaptation during Motor Learning Basic Idea  Internal Model: a mapping from the arm’s position and velocity space into force.  Generalization: a reflection of how this map is encoded, often globally and linearly as a function of position of the limb. Model  Internal Model  Generalization Model

Internal Model (2)  The internal model is adapted by changing the preferred force vector associated with each basis. - : Actual force acting on the hand. - : Learning rate. - : Basis element, with a receptive field covering a specific piece of the space (one of the eight directions), used to encode limb velocity. - : Preferred force vector associated with. - : Predicted force acting on the hand. (1)  Internal model uses basis elements to encode limb velocity.

Generalization Model (3) - : Generalization function, describes how errors experienced in direction k affect the internal model for any other direction l. - : Captures the linearly relationship between position and force. - : Predicted hand position during movement n. - : Error between actual position and predicted position.  Generalization model uses the previous error to update the predicted hand position, based on generalization function.

OUTLINE Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning A Model for Adaptation during Motor Learning Evaluation of the Model Conclusion and Discussion

Evaluation of the Adaptation Model Basic Idea: trail-by-trail approach  Test: field trials (with applied force by the robot) catch trials (without applied forces occasionally) Experimental Setup Measure of Fitness Experiment Results

Experimental Setup Fig 4. Experiment setup. A. Experimental setup and the coordinate system for simulations of human arm and robot arm dynamics. Fig. B-E. Force fields examined.

Measure of Fitness: desired output assumption

Fig 6. Averaged performance of subjects in a clockwise curl field in three successively sets. Gray is subject data, and black is model fit. Circles indicate catch trials. values for all movements within a set are 0.77, 0.80, and 0.77 respectively for sets 1-3. Conclusion: The high degree of fit shows the good performance of the model in describing the trial-by-trial adaptation. Experiment Results (1): Performance of the Generalization Model (dynamic system) Fig 5. Description of the task. Set 1 Set 2 Set 3

Experiment Results (2): Performance of the Internal Model (adaptive controller) Shape of matrix D is compatible but too stiff. Shape of generalization function is not compatible with bimodal shape. Fig 7. Parameters of the fit using Equation 3. A and B are on data from subjects. C and D are on data from simulations with different. A and C represent matrix D. B and D represent generalization function. (3)

Conclusion: T he bases of the internal model have a bimodal shape. Fig 8. Generalization function. A is the shape of a primitive (0.21,0.21) implied by the generalization functions found in the subjects data. B is a model-free assessment of the generalization function in a clockwise curl field as explained in C. Experiment Results (3): Bimodal of the generalization function

Fig 9. Errors and the fit of the model to a set of 192 movements in variations of the standard task (each row). In A, the out-and-back structure is removed. In B-D, the force field is changed. Column (1) represents the average error across all directions. Column (2) represents the error when the movement is 180 o. Column (3) shows the shape of matrix D. Column (4) shows the shape of generalization function. Conclusion: The model works well in different force fields and target sets. Experiment Results (4): Robustness of the Model

Basic Idea Experimental Setup Measure of Fitness Experiment Results  Internal Model approximates force as a function of limb states via a fixed set of basis elements.  Basis elements broadly encodes limb position, but have a bimodal representation of limb velocity. Evaluation of the Adaptation Model

OUTLINE Earlier Experiments on Adaptation during Motor Learning A Model for Adaptation during Motor Learning Evaluation of the Model Conclusion and Discussion

Conclusion The theory relates encoding to generalization by using trial-by-trial changes during adaptation. Internal model approximates force as a function of limb states via a fixed set of basis elements. Basis elements broadly encodes limb position, but have a bimodal representation of limb velocity.

Discussion The internal model is evaluated in a feed forward manner and depends on a desired trajectory. Learning rate, stiffness and viscosity of the arm are all fixed. Basis elements are fixed, while only the force vectors associated with each basis are adapted. Reasonable but not optimal: introduction of nonlinearity could be a key factor in further development.

Thank You !