MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Fast Feedback Responses to Categorical Sensorimotor Errors That Do Not Indicate Error Magnitude Are Optimized Based on Short- and Long-Term Memory

2023· article· en· W4387965129 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael R. McGarity-Shipley, Simona Markovik Jantz, Roland S. Johansson, Daniel M. Wolpert, J. Randall Flanagan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsLift (data mining)AdaptabilityPsychologyCorrective feedbackComputer scienceObject (grammar)Adaptation (eye)Control theory (sociology)Cognitive psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceMedicineControl (management)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skilled motor performance depends critically on rapid corrective responses that act to preserve the goal of the movement in the face of perturbations. Although it is well established that the gain of corrective responses elicited while reaching toward objects adapts to different contexts, little is known about the adaptability of corrective responses supporting the manipulation of objects after they are grasped. Here, we investigated the adaptability of the corrective response elicited when an object being lifted is heavier than expected and fails to lift off when predicted. This response involves a monotonic increase in vertical load force triggered, within ∼90 ms, by the absence of expected sensory feedback signaling lift off and terminated when actual lift off occurs. Critically, because the actual weight of the object cannot be directly sensed at the moment the object fails to lift off, any adaptation of the corrective response would have to be based on memory from previous lifts. We show that when humans, including men and women, repeatedly lift an object that on occasional catch trials increases from a baseline weight to a fixed heavier weight, they scale the gain of the response (i.e., the rate of force increase) to the heavier weight within two to three catch trials. We also show that the gain of the response scales, on the first catch trial, with the baseline weight of the object. Thus, the gain of the lifting response can be adapted by both short- and long-term experience. Finally, we demonstrate that this adaptation preserves the efficacy of the response across contexts. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Here, we present the first investigation of the adaptability of the corrective lifting response elicited when an object is heavier than expected and fails to lift off when predicted. A striking feature of the response, which is driven by a sensory prediction error arising from the absence of expected sensory feedback, is that the magnitude of the error is unknown. That is, the motor system only receives a categorical error indicating that the object is heavier than expected but not its actual weight. Although the error magnitude is not known at the moment the response is elicited, we show that the response can be scaled to predictions of error magnitude based on both recent and long-term memories.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicMotor Control and Adaptation→French-language works237,207→