Abstract
We—as humans—can learn to use tools like hammers, tennis rackets, scalpels or robotic arms. Learning curves to become proficient in using the tools can be very different. Typical questions for learning use of a new tool are the level of complexity in manipulation, i.e. learning time and the ergonomy. We ask here these questions from a cognitive neuroscience perspective: How can we promote fast and natural embodiment of a tool? What are the neuronal mechanisms underlying quick and “natural” incorporation of a tool into the sensory-motor system, with the purpose of gaining proficiency rapidly and efficiently? This approach could benefit practically e.g. design of surgical telemanipulators and at the same time advance knowledge about the sensori-motor control system and learning mechanisms, a topic of interest in neuroprosthetics. We review both behavioral and neurophysiological data and show the importance of a coherent haptic feedback for the emergence of embodiment. We will also present a test platform for studying the mechanisms of incorporation by using advanced haptic interfaces on the master-side and VR environments on the slave side of a telemanipulator aimed at endoscopic surgery.
Keywords
- Embodiment
- Tool incorporation
- Haptic interface
- Telemanipulation
- Force feedback
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
References
A. Berti, F. Frassinetti, When far becomes near: Remapping of space by tool use. J Cognitive Neurosci 12, 415 (May, 2000).
A. Iriki, M. Tanaka, Y. Iwamura, Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurones. Neuroreport 7, 2325 (Oct 2, 1996).
A. M. Okamura, Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Current opinion in urology 19, 102 (Jan, 2009).
A. Maravita, C. Spence, C. Sergent, J. Driver, Seeing your own touched hands in a mirror modulates cross-modal interactions. Psychological science 13, 350 (Jul, 2002).
A. Maravita, C. Spence, S. Kennett, J. Driver, Tool-use changes multimodal spatial interactions between vision and touch in normal humans. Cognition 83, B25 (Mar, 2002).
A. Maravita, From body in the brain, to body in space: sensory and intentional aspects of body representation. I. G. K. M. S. M. Grosjean, Ed., The human body: perception from the inside out (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006).
A. Meyer, Critical review of the data and general methods and deductions of modern neurology. Journal of Comparative Neurology 8, 249 (1898).
A. Sengül, EPFL (2013).
A. Sengül et al., Extending the body to virtual tools using a robotic surgical interface: evidence from the crossmodal congruency task. PloS one 7, e49473 (2012).
J. E. O’Doherty et al., Active tactile exploration using a brain-machine-brain interface. Nature 479, 228 (2011).
B. T. Bethea et al., Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques 14, 191 (2004).
C. Spence, F. Pavani, J. Driver, Spatial constraints on visual-tactile cross-modal distractor congruency effects. Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience 4, 148 (Jun, 2004).
D. Albe-Fessard, J. Liebeskind, Origin of somato-sensitive messages activating the cells of the motor cortex in monkeys]. Experimental brain research. Experimentelle Hirnforschung. Expérimentation cérébrale 1, 127 (1966).
D. Flament, J. Hore, Relations of motor cortex neural discharge to kinematics of passive and active elbow movements in the monkey. Journal of neurophysiology 60, 1268 (1988).
E. V. Evarts, J. Tanji, Reflex and intended responses in motor cortex pyramidal tract neurons of monkey. Journal of neurophysiology 39, 1069 (1976).
F. Pavani, C. Spence, J. Driver, Visual capture of touch: out-of-the-body experiences with rubber gloves. Psychological science 11, 353 (Sep, 2000).
F. Pavani, U. Castiello, Binding personal and extrapersonal space through body shadows. Nature neuroscience 7, 14 (Jan, 2004).
A. Sengül et al., Force feedback facilitates multisensory integration during robotic tool use. Exp Brain Res, 1 (2013).
H. H. Ehrsson, N. P. Holmes, R. E. Passingham, Touching a rubber hand: feeling of body ownership is associated with activity in multisensory brain areas. J Neurosci 25, 10564 (Nov 9, 2005).
H. Ehrsson, B. Rosén, A. Stockselius, C. Ragnö, P. Köhler, G. Lundborg, Upper limb amputees can be induced to experience a rubber hand as their own. Brain, 131(12), 3443–3452 (2008).
J. E. Aspell, B. Lenggenhager, O. Blanke, Keeping in touch with one’s self: multisensory mechanisms of self-consciousness. PloS one 4, e6488 (2009).
M. Bassolino, A. Serino, S. Ubaldi, E. Ladavas, Everyday use of the computer mouse extends peripersonal space representation. Neuropsychologia 48, 803 (Feb, 2010).
M. Botvinick, J. Cohen, Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391, 756 (Feb 19, 1998).
M. Hoffmann et al., Body Schema in Robotics: A Review. IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development 2, 304 (2010).
M. J. Giummarra, S. J. Gibson, N. Georgiou-Karistianis, J. L. Bradshaw, Mechanisms underlying embodiment, disembodiment and loss of embodiment. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews 32, 143 (2008).
M. Nicolelis, J. K. Chapin, Spatiotemporal structure of somatosensory responses of many-neuron ensembles in the rat ventral posterior medial nucleus of the thalamus. The Journal of neuroscience 14, 3511 (1994).
M. Zampini, D. Torresan, C. Spence, M. M. Murray, Auditory-somatosensory multisensory interactions in front and rear space. Neuropsychologia 45, 1869 (Apr 9, 2007).
N. G. Hatsopoulos, A. J. Suminski, Sensing with the motor cortex. Neuron 72, 477 (2011).
N. P. Holmes, Does tool use extend peripersonal space? A review and re-analysis. Exp Brain Res 218, 273 (Apr, 2012).
N. P. Holmes, G. A. Calvert, C. Spence, Extending or projecting peripersonal space with tools? Multisensory interactions highlight only the distal and proximal ends of tools. Neurosci Lett 372, 62 (Nov 30, 2004).
P. D. Marasco, K. Kim, J. E. Colgate, M. A. Peshkin, T. A. Kuiken, Robotic touch shifts perception of embodiment to a prosthesis in targeted reinnervation amputees. Brain 134, 747 (Mar, 2011).
P. Ifft, S. Shokur, M. Lebedev, Z. Li and M.A.L Nicolelis. Brain-Machine Interface Enables Bimanual Arm Movements in Monkeys. Accepted for publication in Science Translational Medicine. 20 September 2013.
S. Shokur et al., Expanding the primate body schema in sensorimotor cortex by virtual touches of an avatar. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110, 15121 (2013).
V. Gallese, C. Keysers, G. Rizzolatti, A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends Cogn Sci 8, 396 (2004).
Acknowledgments
The research work reported here was partially supported by the SAFROS FP-7 project of the European Union and by Grant No. 900 of MESROB Research Council (Swiss National Science Foundation SNF).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sengul, A., Shokur, S., Bleuler, H. (2014). Brain Incorporation of Artificial Limbs and Role of Haptic Feedback. In: Rodić, A., Pisla, D., Bleuler, H. (eds) New Trends in Medical and Service Robots. Mechanisms and Machine Science, vol 20. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05431-5_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05431-5_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05430-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05431-5
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)