Basal Ganglia Perform Differencing Between ‘Desired’ and ‘Experienced’ Parameters
The recently introduced first order SDS feedback control scheme1 has been suggested as a suitable model of the basal ganglia — thalamocortical (BTC) loops2. The first order SDS model of the BTC loops can be extended to plants of any order3 by slight modification of the original scheme. This SDS model identifies the direct and the indirect pathways of basal ganglia (BG) that respectively tend to enhance and suppress the reentrant thalamocortical excitation4 with the desired (planned) and experienced channels of the SDS scheme. The model predicts that a relatively high contribution from the desired channel results in Huntington’s disease whereas a relatively high contribution from the experienced channel results in Parkinson’s disease. The model can be considered as a mathematical framework of the phenomenological thalamic disinhibition (TDI) model of DeLong4. The TDI model suggests that if the BG output is increased (decreased) it shifts the motion towards hypokinetic (hyperkinetic) states. Despite explaining several features of the BTC loops, the TDI model also predicts that lesion to the BG output recipient zones of the thalamus results in akinesia, which is not the case. This pitfall is avoided in the SDS model. The features of the general new scheme utilized to model the BTC loops are described in this paper.
KeywordsBasal Ganglion Control Vector Model Neuron Supplementary Motor Area Inverse Dynamic
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.A. Lőrincz, Static and dynamic state feedback control model of basal ganglia — t h alamo cortical loops, J. Int. Neural Systems (In press).Google Scholar
- 3.Cs. Szepesvári and A. Lőrincz, Approximate inverse-dynamics based robust control using static and dynamic state feedback, in: “Applications of Neural Adaptive Control Thechnology” J. Kalkkuhl, K. J. Hunt, R. Zbikowski, and A. Dzielinski, eds. World Scientific, Singapore (1997).Google Scholar
- 4.M.R. DeLong, Primate models of movement disorders of basal ganglia origin, TINS 13: 281 (1990).Google Scholar
- 6.R. Malach and A.M. Graybiel, Mosaic architecture of the somatic sensory-recipient sector of the cat’s striatum, J. Neurosci. 12: 3436 (1986).Google Scholar
- 10.Cs. Szepesvári and A. Lőrincz, An integrated architecture for motion-control and planning, J. Robotic Systems (In press).Google Scholar
- 12.G.E. Alexander G. E. and M. D. Crutcher, Control of goal-directed limb movements in primates: Neurobiological evidence for parallel, distributed motor processing, in: “Neurobiology of Motor Programme Selection,” J. Kien, C. R. McCrohan, W. Winlow, eds., Pergamon, Oxford (1992).Google Scholar
- 13.C. W. Anderson and W. T. Miller III, Challenging control problems, in: “Neural Networks for Control,” W.T. Miller III, R.S. Sutton, P.J. Werbos, eds. MIT Press, Cambridge MA (1990).Google Scholar
- 14.Cs. Szepesvári and A. Lőrincz, (Unpublished observations).Google Scholar
- 15.W. Schultz, P. Apicella, R. Romo, and E. Scarnati, Context-dependent activity in primate striatum reflecting past and future behavioral events, in: “Models of Information Processing in the Basal Ganglia”, J. C. Houk, ed., MIT Press, Cambridge (1995).Google Scholar
- 16.J. C. Houk, J. L. Adams, and A. G. Barto, A model how the basal ganglia generate and use neural signals that predict reinforcement, in: “Models of Information Processing in the Basal Ganglia”, J. C. Houk, ed., MIT Press, Cambridge (1995).Google Scholar
- 17.G. S. Berns and T. J. Sejnowski, How the basal ganglia makes decisions, in: “Neurobiology of Decision Making”, A. Damasio, ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1995).Google Scholar