Challenging balance during sensorimotor adaptation increases generalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From reaching to walking, real-life experience suggests that people can generalize between motor behaviors. One possible explanation for this generalization is that real-life behaviors often challenge our balance. We propose that the exacerbated body motions associated with balance-challenged whole body movements increase the value to the nervous system of using a comprehensive internal model to control the task. Because it is less customized to a specific task, a more comprehensive model is also a more generalizable model. Here we tested the hypothesis that challenging balance during adaptation would increase generalization of a newly learned internal model. We encouraged participants to learn a new internal model using prism lenses that created a new visuomotor mapping. Four groups of participants adapted to prisms while performing either a standing-based reaching or precision walking task, with or without a manipulation that challenged balance. To assess generalization after the adaptation phase, participants performed a single trial of each of the other groups’ tasks without prisms. We found that both the reaching and walking balance-challenged groups showed significantly greater generalization to the equivalent, nonadapted task than the balance-unchallenged groups. Additionally, we found some evidence that all groups generalized across tasks, for example, from walking to reaching and vice versa, regardless of balance manipulation. Overall, our results demonstrate that challenging balance increases the degree to which a newly learned internal model generalizes to untrained movements. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Real-life experience indicates that people can generalize between motor behaviors. Here we show that challenging balance during the learning of a new internal model increases the degree of generalization to untrained movements for both reaching and walking tasks. These results suggest that the effects of challenging balance are not specific to the task but instead apply to motor learning more broadly.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".