Physical interaction with tools is ubiquitous in functional activities of daily living. While tool use is considered a hallmark of human behavior, how humans control such physical interactions is still poorly understood. When humans perform a motor task, it is commonly suggested that the central nervous system coordinates the musculo-skeletal system to minimize muscle effort. In this paper, we tested if this notion holds true for motor tasks that involve physical interaction. Specifically, we investigated whether humans minimize muscle forces to control physical interaction with a circular kinematic constraint.
Using a simplified arm model, we derived three predictions for how humans should behave if they were minimizing muscular effort to perform the task. First, we predicted that subjects would exert workless, radial forces on the constraint. Second, we predicted that the muscles would be deactivated when they could not contribute to work. Third, we predicted that when moving very slowly along the constraint, the pattern of muscle activity would not differ between clockwise (CW) and counterclockwise (CCW) motions.
To test these predictions, we instructed human subjects to move a robot handle around a virtual, circular constraint at a constant tangential velocity. To reduce the effect of forces that might arise from incomplete compensation of neuro-musculo-skeletal dynamics, the target tangential speed was set to an extremely slow pace (~1 revolution every 13.3 seconds). Ultimately, the results of human experiment did not support the predictions derived from our model of minimizing muscular effort. While subjects did exert workless forces, they did not deactivate muscles as predicted. Furthermore, muscle activation patterns differed between CW and CCW motions about the constraint. These findings demonstrate that minimizing muscle effort is not a significant factor in human performance of this constrained-motion task. Instead, the central nervous system likely prioritizes reducing other costs, such as computational effort, over muscle effort to control physical interactions.
more »
« less
Controlling Physical Interactions: Humans Do Not Minimize Muscle Effort
Physical interaction with tools is ubiquitous in functional activities of daily living. While tool use is considered a hallmark of human behavior, how humans control such physical interactions is still poorly understood. When humans perform a motor task, it is commonly suggested that the central nervous system coordinates the musculo-skeletal system to minimize muscle effort. In this paper, we tested if this notion holds true for motor tasks that involve physical interaction. Specifically, we investigated whether humans minimize muscle forces to control physical interaction with a circular kinematic constraint.
Using a simplified arm model, we derived three predictions for how humans should behave if they were minimizing muscular effort to perform the task. First, we predicted that subjects would exert workless, radial forces on the constraint. Second, we predicted that the muscles would be deactivated when they could not contribute to work. Third, we predicted that when moving very slowly along the constraint, the pattern of muscle activity would not differ between clockwise (CW) and counterclockwise (CCW) motions.
To test these predictions, we instructed human subjects to move a robot handle around a virtual, circular constraint at a constant tangential velocity. To reduce the effect of forces that might arise from incomplete compensation of neuro-musculo-skeletal dynamics, the target tangential speed was set to an extremely slow pace (~1 revolution every 13.3 seconds). Ultimately, the results of human experiment did not support the predictions derived from our model of minimizing muscular effort. While subjects did exert workless forces, they did not deactivate muscles as predicted. Furthermore, muscle activation patterns differed between CW and CCW motions about the constraint. These findings demonstrate that minimizing muscle effort is not a significant factor in human performance of this constrained-motion task. Instead, the central nervous system likely prioritizes reducing other costs, such as computational effort, over muscle effort to control physical interactions.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1637824
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10047609
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Conference
- ISSN:
- 2151-1853
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Physical interaction with tools is ubiquitous in functional activities of daily living. While tool use is considered a hallmark of human behavior, how humans control such physical interactions is still poorly understood. When humans perform a motor task, it is commonly suggested that the central nervous system coordinates the musculo-skeletal system to minimize muscle effort. In this paper, we tested if this notion holds true for motor tasks that involve physical interaction. Specifically, we investigated whether humans minimize muscle forces to control physical interaction with a circular kinematic constraint. Using a simplified arm model, we derived three predictions for how humans should behave if they were minimizing muscular effort to perform the task. First, we predicted that subjects would exert workless, radial forces on the constraint. Second, we predicted that the muscles would be deactivated when they could not contribute to work. Third, we predicted that when moving very slowly along the constraint, the pattern of muscle activity would not differ between clockwise (CW) and counterclockwise (CCW) motions. To test these predictions, we instructed human subjects to move a robot handle around a virtual, circular constraint at a constant tangential velocity. To reduce the effect of forces that might arise from incomplete compensation of neuro-musculo-skeletal dynamics, the target tangential speed was set to an extremely slow pace (~1 revolution every 13.3 seconds). Ultimately, the results of human experiment did not support the predictions derived from our model of minimizing muscular effort. While subjects did exert workless forces, they did not deactivate muscles as predicted. Furthermore, muscle activation patterns differed between CW and CCW motions about the constraint. These findings demonstrate that minimizing muscle effort is not a significant factor in human performance of this constrained-motion task. Instead, the central nervous system likely prioritizes reducing other costs, such as computational effort, over muscle effort to control physical interactions.more » « less
-
Physical interaction with tools is ubiquitous in functional activities of daily living. While tool use is considered a hallmark of human behavior, how humans control such physical interactions is still poorly understood. When humans perform a motor task, it is commonly suggested that the central nervous system coordinates the musculo-skeletal system to minimize muscle effort. In this paper, we tested if this notion holds true for motor tasks that involve physical interaction. Specifically, we investigated whether humans minimize muscle forces to control physical interaction with a circular kinematic constraint. Using a simplified arm model, we derived three predictions for how humans should behave if they were minimizing muscular effort to perform the task. First, we predicted that subjects would exert workless, radial forces on the constraint. Second, we predicted that the muscles would be deactivated when they could not contribute to work. Third, we predicted that when moving very slowly along the constraint, the pattern of muscle activity would not differ between clockwise (CW) and counterclockwise (CCW) motions. To test these predictions, we instructed human subjects to move a robot handle around a virtual, circular constraint at a constant tangential velocity. To reduce the effect of forces that might arise from incomplete compensation of neuro-musculo-skeletal dynamics, the target tangential speed was set to an extremely slow pace (~1 revolution every 13.3 seconds). Ultimately, the results of human experiment did not support the predictions derived from our model of minimizing muscular effort. While subjects did exert workless forces, they did not deactivate muscles as predicted. Furthermore, muscle activation patterns differed between CW and CCW motions about the constraint. These findings demonstrate that minimizing muscle effort is not a significant factor in human performance of this constrained-motion task. Instead, the central nervous system likely prioritizes reducing other costs, such as computational effort, over muscle effort to control physical interactions.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Background Maintaining upright posture is an unstable task that requires sophisticated neuro-muscular control. Humans use foot–ground interaction forces, characterized by point of application, magnitude, and direction to manage body accelerations. When analyzing the directions of the ground reaction forces of standing humans in the frequency domain, previous work found a consistent pattern in different frequency bands. To test whether this frequency-dependent behavior provided a distinctive signature of neural control or was a necessary consequence of biomechanics, this study simulated quiet standing and compared the results with human subject data.
Methods Aiming to develop the simplest competent and neuromechanically justifiable dynamic model that could account for the pattern observed across multiple subjects, we first explored the minimum number of degrees of freedom required for the model. Then, we applied a well-established optimal control method that was parameterized to maximize physiologically-relevant insight to stabilize the balancing model.
Results If a standing human was modeled as a single inverted pendulum, no controller could reproduce the experimentally observed pattern. The simplest competent model that approximated a standing human was a double inverted pendulum with torque-actuated ankle and hip joints. A range of controller parameters could stabilize this model and reproduce the general trend observed in experimental data; this result seems to indicate a biomechanical constraint and not a consequence of control. However, details of the frequency-dependent pattern varied substantially across tested control parameter values. The set of parameters that best reproduced the human experimental results suggests that the control strategy employed by human subjects to maintain quiet standing was best described by minimal control effort with an emphasis on ankle torque.
Conclusions The findings suggest that the frequency-dependent pattern of ground reaction forces observed in quiet standing conveys quantitative information about human control strategies. This study’s method might be extended to investigate human neural control strategies in different contexts of balance, such as with an assistive device or in neurologically impaired subjects.
-
null (Ed.)This study assessed the metabolic energy consumption of walking with the external components of a “Muscle-First” Motor Assisted Hybrid Neuroprosthesis (MAHNP), which combines implanted neuromuscular stimulation with a motorized exoskeleton. The “Muscle-First” approach prioritizes generating motion with the wearer's own muscles via electrical stimulation with the actuators assisting on an as-needed basis. The motorized exoskeleton contributes passive resistance torques at both the hip and knee joints of 6Nm and constrains motions to the sagittal plane. For the muscle contractions elicited by neural stimulation to be most effective, the motorized joints need to move freely when not actively assisting the desired motion. This study isolated the effect of the passive resistance or “friction” added at the joints by the assistive motors and transmissions on the metabolic energy consumption of walking in the device. Oxygen consumption was measured on six able-bodied subjects performing 6 min walk tests at three different speeds (0.4, 0.8, and 1.2 m/s) under two different conditions: one with the motors producing no torque to compensate for friction, and the other having the motors injecting power to overcome passive friction based on a feedforward friction model. Average oxygen consumption in the uncompensated condition across all speeds, measured in Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METs), was statistically different than the friction compensated condition. There was an average decrease of 8.8% for METs and 1.9% for heart rate across all speeds. While oxygen consumption was reduced when the brace performed friction compensation, other factors may have a greater contribution to the metabolic energy consumption when using the device. Future studies will assess the effects of gravity compensation on the muscular effort required to lift the weight of the distal segments of the exoskeleton as well as the sagittal plane constraint on walking motions in individuals with spinal cord injuries (SCI).more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
