Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 235, Issue 8, pp 2561–2573 | Cite as

Control of force during rapid visuomotor force-matching tasks can be described by discrete time PID control algorithms

  • Jakob Lund Dideriksen
  • Daniel F. Feeney
  • Awad M. Almuklass
  • Roger M. Enoka
Research Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Force trajectories during isometric force-matching tasks involving isometric contractions vary substantially across individuals. In this study, we investigated if this variability can be explained by discrete time proportional, integral, derivative (PID) control algorithms with varying model parameters. To this end, we analyzed the pinch force trajectories of 24 subjects performing two rapid force-matching tasks with visual feedback. Both tasks involved isometric contractions to a target force of 10% maximal voluntary contraction. One task involved a single action (pinch) and the other required a double action (concurrent pinch and wrist extension). 50,000 force trajectories were simulated with a computational neuromuscular model whose input was determined by a PID controller with different PID gains and frequencies at which the controller adjusted muscle commands. The goal was to find the best match between each experimental force trajectory and all simulated trajectories. It was possible to identify one realization of the PID controller that matched the experimental force produced during each task for most subjects (average index of similarity: 0.87 ± 0.12; 1 = perfect similarity). The similarities for both tasks were significantly greater than that would be expected by chance (single action: p = 0.01; double action: p = 0.04). Furthermore, the identified control frequencies in the simulated PID controller with the greatest similarities decreased as task difficulty increased (single action: 4.0 ± 1.8 Hz; double action: 3.1 ± 1.3 Hz). Overall, the results indicate that discrete time PID controllers are realistic models for the neural control of force in rapid force-matching tasks involving isometric contractions.

Keywords

Motor control Visuomotor tasks Isometric force Computational models 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Almuklass A, Price R, Gould J, Enoka R (2016) Force steadiness as a predictor of time to complete a pegboard test of dexterity in young men and women. J Appl Physiol 120:1410–1417CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambike SS, Paclet F, Latash ML, Zatsiorsky VM (2013) Grip-force modulation in multi-finger prehension during wrist flexion and extension. Exp Brain Res 227:509–522CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Ang KH, Chong G, Li Y (2005) PID control system analysis, design, and technology. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 13:559–576. doi: 10.1109/TCST.2005.847331 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry BK, Pascoe MA, Jesunathadas M, Enoka RM (2007) Rate coding is compressed but variability is unaltered for motor units in a hand muscle of old adults. J Neurophysiol 97:3206–3218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bays PM, Wolpert DM (2007) Computational principles of sensorimotor control that minimize uncertainty and variability. J Physiol 578:387–396CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bessou P, Joffroy M, Montoya R, Pages B (1990) Evidence of the co-activation of alpha-motoneurones and static gamma-motoneurones of the sartorius medialis muscle during locomotion in the thalamic cat. Exp Brain Res 82:191–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Burge J, Ernst MO, Banks MS (2008) The statistical determinants of adaptation rate in human reaching. J Vis 8:20.1–19Google Scholar
  8. Carlton LG (1981) Processing visual feedback information for movement control. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 7:1019CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Craik KJW (1947) Theory of the human operator in control systems. I. The operator as an engineering system. Br J Psychol 38:56–61Google Scholar
  10. De Luca CJ, Erim Z (2002) Common drive in motor units of a synergistic muscle pair. J Neurophysiol 87:2200–2204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dideriksen JL, Farina D, Baekgaard M, Enoka RM (2010) An integrative model of motor unit activity during sustained submaximal contractions. J Appl Physiol 108:1550–1562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dideriksen JL, Negro F, Enoka RM, Farina D (2012) Motor unit recruitment strategies and muscle properties determine the influence of synaptic noise on force steadiness. J Neurophysiol 107:3357–3369CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Diedrichsen J, Shadmehr R, Ivry RB (2010) The coordination of movement: optimal feedback control and beyond. Trends Cogn Sci 14:31–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fuglevand AJ, Winter DA, Patla AE (1993) Models of recruitment and rate coding organization in motor-unit pools. J Neurophysiol 70:2470–2488PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gawthrop P, Loram I, Lakie M, Gollee H (2011) Intermittent control: a computational theory of human control. Biol Cybern 104:31–51CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gawthrop P, Gollee H, Loram I (2014) Intermittent control in man and machine. arXiv:1407.3543
  17. Goodale MA, Pelisson D, Prablanc C (1986) Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement. Nature 320:748–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Jo S, Massaquoi SG (2004) A model of cerebellum stabilized and scheduled hybrid long-loop control of upright balance. Biol Cybern 91:188–202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jones KE, Hamilton AF, Wolpert DM (2002) Sources of signal-dependent noise during isometric force production. J Neurophysiol 88:1533–1544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Körding KP, Wolpert DM (2004) Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning. Nature 427:244–247CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Laine CM, Martinez-valdes E, Falla D et al (2015) Motor neuron pools of synergistic thigh muscles share most of their synaptic input. J Neurosci 35:12207–12216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Loram ID, Lakie M, Gawthrop PJ (2009) Visual control of stable and unstable loads: what is the feedback delay and extent of linear time-invariant control? J Physiol 587:1343–1365CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Loram ID, Gollee H, Lakie M, Gawthrop PJ (2011) Human control of an inverted pendulum: is continuous control necessary? Is intermittent control effective? Is intermittent control physiological? J Physiol 589:307–324CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Loram ID, Van De Kamp C, Lakie M et al (2014) Does the motor system need intermittent control? Exerc Sport Sci Rev 42:117–125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Maluf KS, Shinohara M, Stephenson JL, Enoka RM (2005) Muscle activation and time to task failure differ with load type and contraction intensity for a human hand muscle. Exp Brain Res 167:165–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Manto M, Bower JM, Conforto AB et al (2012) Consensus paper: roles of the cerebellum in motor control-the diversity of ideas on cerebellar involvement in movement. Cerebellum 11(2):457–487CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. McNaughton BL, Battaglia FP, Jensen O et al (2006) Path integration and the neural basis of the “cognitive map”. Nat Rev Neurosci 7:663–678CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Miall RC, Weir DJ, Stein JF (1986) Manual tracking of visual targets by trained monkeys. Behav Brain Res 20:185–201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Miall RC, Weir DJ, Stein JF (1993) Intermittency in human manual tracking tasks. J Mot Behav 25:53–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Mileusnic MP, Brown IE, Lan N, Loeb GE (2006) Mathematical models of proprioceptors. I. Control and transduction in the muscle spindle. J Neurophysiol 96:1772–1788CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Moritz CT, Barry BK, Pascoe MA, Enoka RM (2005) Discharge rate variability influences the variation in force fluctuations across the working range of a hand muscle. J Neurophysiol 93:2449–2459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Negro F, Holobar A, Farina D (2009) Fluctuations in isometric muscle force can be described by one linear projection of low-frequency components of motor unit discharge rates. J Physiol 587:5925–5938CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Neilson PD, Neilson MD, O’Dwyer NJ (1988) Internal models and intermittency: a theoretical account of human tracking behavior. Biol Cybern 58:101–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. O’Sullivan I, Burdet E, Diedrichsen J (2009) Dissociating Variability and Effort as Determinants of Coordination. PLoS Comput Biol 5:e1000345CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Peterka RJ (2002) Sensorimotor integration in human postural control. J Neurophysiol 88:1097–1118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Peterka RJ, Loughlin PJ (2004) Dynamic regulation of sensorimotor integration in human postural control. J Neurophysiol 91:410–423CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Proske U, Gandevia SC (2009) The kinaesthetic senses. J Physiol 587:4139–4146CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Rudroff T, Justice JN, Matthews S et al (2010) Muscle activity differs with load compliance during fatiguing contractions with the knee extensor muscles. Exp Brain Res 203:307–316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Scott SH (2012) The computational and neural basis of voluntary motor control and planning. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16:541–549CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Slifkin AB, Vaillancourt DE, Newell KM (2000) Intermittency in the control of continuous force production. J Neurophysiol 84:1708–1718PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sosnoff JJ, Newell KM (2006) Aging, visual intermittency, and variability in isometric force output. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 61B:P117–P124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sosnoff JJ, Valantine AD, Newell KM (2006) Independence between the amount and structure of variability at low force levels. Neurosci Lett 392:165–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Tracy BL, Maluf KS, Stephenson JL et al (2005) Variability of motor unit discharge and force fluctuations across a range of muscle forces in older adults. Muscle Nerve 32:533–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Tresch MC, Jarc A (2009) The case for and against muscle synergies. Curr Opin Neurobiol 19:601–607CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. van de Kamp C, Gawthrop PJ, Gollee H, Loram ID (2013) Refractoriness in sustained visuo-manual control: is the refractory duration intrinsic or does it depend on external system properties? PLoS Comput Biol 9:e1002843CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. Welch TDJ, Ting LH (2008) A feedback model reproduces muscle activity during human postural responses to support-surface translations. J Neurophysiol 99:1032–1038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Werremeyer MM, Cole KJ (1997) Wrist action affects precision grip force. J Neurophysiol 78:271–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wolpert DM, Diedrichsen J, Flanagan JR (2011) Principles of sensorimotor learning. Nat Rev Neurosci 12:739–751PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jakob Lund Dideriksen
    • 1
  • Daniel F. Feeney
    • 2
  • Awad M. Almuklass
    • 2
    • 3
  • Roger M. Enoka
    • 2
  1. 1.SMI, Department of Health Science and TechnologyAalborg UniversityAalborg ØDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Integrative PhysiologyUniversity of Colorado BoulderBoulderUSA
  3. 3.College of MedicineKing Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health SciencesRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations