Robust Control in Human Reaching Movements: A Model-Free Strategy to Compensate for Unpredictable Disturbances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current models of motor learning suggest that multiple timescales support adaptation to changes in visual or mechanical properties of the environment. These models capture patterns of learning and memory across a broad range of tasks, yet do not consider the possibility that rapid changes in behavior may occur without adaptation. Such changes in behavior may be desirable when facing transient disturbances, or when unpredictable changes in visual or mechanical properties of the task make it difficult to form an accurate model of the perturbation. Whether humans can modulate control strategies without an accurate model of the perturbation remains unknown. Here we frame this question in the context of robust control ( H ∞ -control), a control strategy that specifically considers unpredictable disturbances by increasing initial movement speed and feedback gains. Correspondingly, we demonstrate in two human reaching experiments including males and females that the occurrence of a single unpredictable disturbance led to an increase in movement speed and in the gain of rapid feedback responses to mechanical disturbances on subsequent movements. This strategy reduced perturbation-related motion regardless of the direction of the perturbation. Furthermore, we found that changes in the control strategy were associated with co-contraction, which amplified the gain of muscle responses to both lengthening and shortening perturbations. These results have important implications for studies on motor adaptation because they highlight that trial-by-trial changes in limb motion also reflected changes in control strategies dissociable from error-based adaptation. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Humans and animals use internal representations of movement dynamics to anticipate the impact of predictable disturbances. However, we are often confronted with transient or unpredictable disturbances, and it remains unknown whether and how the nervous system handles these disturbances over fast time scales. Here we hypothesized that humans can modulate their control strategy to make reaching movements less sensitive to perturbations. We tested this hypothesis in the framework of robust control, and found changes in movement speed and feedback gains consistent with the model predictions. These changes impacted participants' behavior on a trial-by-trial basis. We conclude that compensation for disturbances over fast time scales involves a robust control strategy, which potentially plays a key role in motor planning and execution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".