MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321479770 · doi:10.1101/2023.02.22.529399

Sensory prediction error drives subconscious motor learning outside of the laboratory

2023· preprint· en· W4321479770 on OpenAlexaff
Scott T. Albert, Emily M. Blaum, Daniel Blustein

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubconsciousComputer scienceMotor learningAdaptation (eye)Implicit learningBall (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceSensory systemTask (project management)Cognitive psychologyPsychologyMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sensorimotor adaptation is supported by at least two parallel learning systems: an intentionally controlled explicit strategy, and an involuntary implicit learning system. To investigate the error sources driving these two systems, past work focused on constrained reaches or finger movements in laboratory environments has shown subconscious learning systems to be driven in part by sensory prediction error (SPE), i.e., the mismatch between the realized and expected outcome of an action. We designed a ball rolling task to explore whether SPEs can drive implicit motor adaptation during complex whole-body movements that impart physical motion on external objects. After applying a visual shift, participants rapidly adapted their rolling angles to reduce the error between the ball and target. We removed all visual feedback and told participants to aim their throw directly toward the primary target, revealing an unintentional 5.06° implicit adjustment to reach angles that decayed over time. To determine whether this implicit adaptation was driven by SPE, we gave participants a second aiming target that would ‘solve’ the visual shift, as in Mazzoni and Krakauer (2006). Remarkably, after rapidly reducing ball rolling error to zero (due to enhancements in strategic aiming), the additional aiming target caused rolling angles to deviate beyond the primary target by 3.15°. This involuntary overcompensation, which worsened task performance, is a hallmark of SPE-driven implicit learning. These results show that SPE-driven implicit processes, previously observed within simplified finger or planar reaching movements, actively contribute to motor adaptation in more complex naturalistic skill-based tasks. New and Noteworthy Implicit and explicit learning systems have been detected using simple, constrained movements inside the laboratory. How these systems impact movements during complex whole-body, skill-based tasks has not been established. Here we demonstrate that sensory prediction errors significantly impact how a person updates their movements, replicating findings from the laboratory in an unconstrained ball-rolling task. This real-world validation is an important step towards explaining how subconscious learning helps humans execute common motor skills in dynamic environments.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicMotor Control and Adaptation→French-language works237,207→