Distinct Neural Components of Visually Guided Grasping during Planning and Execution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selecting suitable grasps on three-dimensional objects is a challenging visuomotor computation, which involves combining information about an object (e.g., its shape, size, and mass) with information about the actor's body (e.g., the optimal grasp aperture and hand posture for comfortable manipulation). Here, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate brain networks associated with these distinct aspects during grasp planning and execution. Human participants of either sex viewed and then executed preselected grasps on L-shaped objects made of wood and/or brass. By leveraging a computational approach that accurately predicts human grasp locations, we selected grasp points that disentangled the role of multiple grasp-relevant factors, that is, grasp axis, grasp size, and object mass. Representational Similarity Analysis revealed that grasp axis was encoded along dorsal-stream regions during grasp planning. Grasp size was first encoded in ventral stream areas during grasp planning then in premotor regions during grasp execution. Object mass was encoded in ventral stream and (pre)motor regions only during grasp execution. Premotor regions further encoded visual predictions of grasp comfort, whereas the ventral stream encoded grasp comfort during execution, suggesting its involvement in haptic evaluation. These shifts in neural representations thus capture the sensorimotor transformations that allow humans to grasp objects. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Grasping requires integrating object properties with constraints on hand and arm postures. Using a computational approach that accurately predicts human grasp locations by combining such constraints, we selected grasps on objects that disentangled the relative contributions of object mass, grasp size, and grasp axis during grasp planning and execution in a neuroimaging study. Our findings reveal a greater role of dorsal-stream visuomotor areas during grasp planning, and, surprisingly, increasing ventral stream engagement during execution. We propose that during planning, visuomotor representations initially encode grasp axis and size. Perceptual representations of object material properties become more relevant instead as the hand approaches the object and motor programs are refined with estimates of the grip forces required to successfully lift the object.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".