Biological Cybernetics

, Volume 91, Issue 5, pp 275–282 | Cite as

Dynamical simulation of speech cooperative articulation by muscle linkages

  • Takayuki Ito
  • Hiroaki Gomi
  • Masaaki Honda


Different kinds of articulators, such as the upper and lower lips, jaw, and tongue, are precisely coordinated in speech production. Based on a perturbation study of the production of a fricative consonant using the upper and lower lips, it has been suggested that increasing the stiffness in the muscle linkage between the upper lip and jaw is beneficial for maintaining the constriction area between the lips (Gomi et al. 2002). This hypothesis is crucial for examining the mechanism of speech motor control, that is, whether mechanical impedance is controlled for the speech motor coordination. To test this hypothesis, in the current study we performed a dynamical simulation of lip compensatory movements based on a muscle linkage model and then evaluated the performance of compensatory movements. The temporal pattern of stiffness of muscle linkage was obtained from the electromyogram (EMG) of the orbicularis oris superior (OOS) muscle by using the temporal transformation (second-order dynamics with time delay) from EMG to stiffness, whose parameters were experimentally determined. The dynamical simulation using stiffness estimated from empirical EMG successfully reproduced the temporal profile of the upper lip compensatory articulations. Moreover, the estimated stiffness variation significantly contributed to reproduce a functional modulation of the compensatory response. This result supports the idea that the mechanical impedance highly contributes to organizing coordination among the lips and jaw. The motor command would be programmed not only to generate movement in each articulator but also to regulate mechanical impedance among articulators for robust coordination of speech motor control.


Dynamical Simulation Functional Modulation Motor Coordination Motor Command Speech Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abbs JH, Folkins JW, Sivarajan M (1976) Motor impairment following blockade of the infraorbital: nerve implications for the use of anesthetization techniques in speech research. J Speech Hear Res 19(1):19–35Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abbs JH, Gracco VL, Cole KJ (1984) Control of multimovement coordination: sensorimotor mechanisms in speech motor programming. J Mot Behav 16(2):195–231Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agarwal GC, Gottlieb CL (1977) Compliance of the human ankle joint. Trans ASME 99:166–170Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Akazawa K, Takizawa H, Hayashi Y, Fujii K (1988) Development of control system and myoelectric signal processor for bio-mimetic prosthetic hand. Biomechanism 9:43–53Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bennett DJ, Hollerbach JM, Xu Y, Hunter IW (1992) Time-varying stiffness of human elbow joint during cyclic voluntary movement. Exp Brain Res 88:433–442Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burdet E, Osu R, Franklin DW, Milner TE, Kawato M (2001) The central nervous system stabilizes unstable dynamics by learning optimal impedance. Nature 414:446–449Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cooker HS, Larson CR, Luschei ES (1980) Evidence that the human jaw stretch reflex increases the resistance of the mandible to small displacement. J Physiol 308:61–78Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Folkins JW, Abbs JH (1975) Lip and jaw motor control during speech: responses to resistive loading of the jaw. J Speech Hear Res 18:207–220Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gomi H, Ito T, Murano EZ, Honda M (2002) Compensatory articulation during bilabial fricative production by regulating muscle stiffness. J Phon 30(3):261–279Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gomi H, Osu R (1996) Human arm stiffness and viscosity in interaction with environments on a horizontal plane. Technical Report ISRL-96-3, NTT Basic Research Laboratories, Information Science Research Laboratory, Kanagawa, JapanGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gomi H, Osu R (1998) Task-dependent viscoelasticity of human multijoint arm and its spatial characteristics for interaction with environments. J Neurosci 18(21):8965–8978Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gracco VL, Abbs JH (1985) Dynamic control of perioral system during speech: kinematic analysis of autogenic and nonautogenic sensorimotor processes. J Neurophysiol 54(2):418–432Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hain TC, Burnett TA, Larson CR, Kiran S (2001) Effects of delayed auditory feedback (daf) on the pitch-shift reflex. J Acoust Soc Am 109(5 Pt 1):2146–2152Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hogan N (1984) Adaptive control of mechanical impedance by coactivation of antagonist muscles. IEEE Trans Auto Cont AC-29(8):681–690Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Houde JF, Jordan MI (1998) Sensorimotor adaptation in speech production. Science 279(5354):1213–1216Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ito T, Gomi H, Honda M (2000) Task dependent jaw-lip coordination examined by jaw perturbation during bilabial-consonant utterances. In: Proceedings of the 5th seminar on speech production (SPS5), 1–4 May 2000, Kloster Seeon, Bavaria, Germany, pp 41–44Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ito T, Gomi H, Honda M (2003) Articulatory coordination using mechanical linkage between upper lip and jaw examined by jaw perturbation. Trans IEICE J86-DII(2):333–341Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kearney RE, Hunter IW (1982) Dynamics of human ankle stiffness: variation with displacement amplitude. J Biomech 15(10):753–756Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kearney RE, Hunter IW (1990) System identification of human joint dynamics. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 18:55–87Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kelso JAS, Tuller B, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Fowler CA (1984) Functionally specific articulatory cooperation following jaw perturbations during speech: evidence for coordinative structures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 10(6):812–832Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kelso JAS, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Saltzman EL, Kay B (1985) A qualitative dynamics analysis of reiterant speech production: phase portraits, kinematics, and dynamic modeling. J Acoust Soc Am 77(1):266–280Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koike Y, Kawato M (1995) Estimation of dynamic joint torque and trajectory formation from surface electromyography signals using a neural network model. Biol Cybern 73:291–300Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lacquaniti F, Carrozzo M, Borghese NA (1993) Time-varying mechanical behavior of multijointed arm in man. J Neurophysiol 69(5):1443–1464Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mannard A, Stein RB (1973) Determination of the frequency response of isometric soleus muscle in the cat using random nerve stimulation. J Physiol 229(2):275–296Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Meek SG, Wood JE, Jacobsen SC (1990) Model-based, multi-muscle EMG control of upper-extremity prostheses. In: Winters JM, Woo S-Y (eds) Multiple muscle systems. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 360–376Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Hogan N, Bizzi E (1985) Neural, mechanical, and geometric factors subserving arm posture in humans. J Neurosci 5(10):2732–2743Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Osu R, Franklin DW, Kato H, Gomi H, Domen K, Yoshioka T, Kawato M (2001) Short-and long-term changes in joint co-contraction associated with motor learning as revealed from surface EMG . J Neurophysiol 88(2):991–1004Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Osu R, Gomi H (1999) Multijoint muscle regulation mechanisms examined by measured human arm stiffness and EMG signals. J Neurophysiol 81(4):1458–1468Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Saltzman E (1986) Task dynamic coordination of the speech articulators: a preliminary model. Experimental Brain Research Series, vol 15. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shaiman S (1989) Kinematic and electromyographic responses to perturbation of the jaw. J Acoust Soc Am 86(1):78–88Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stevens KN (1998) Acoustic phonetics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tremblay S, Shiller D, Ostry D (2003) Somatosensory basis of speech production. Nature 423:866–869Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NTT Communication Science LaboratoriesNippon Telegraph and Telephone CorporationAtsugiJapan
  2. 2.Interdisciplinary Graduate School of Science and EngineeringTokyo Institute of TechnologyYokohamaJapan
  3. 3.Waseda universityTokorozawaJapan

Personalised recommendations