JN Watch the video to learn how APS reaches out to developing nations.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (January 24, 2007). doi:10.1152/jn.00164.2006
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
97/3/2439    most recent
00164.2006v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, A. A
Right arrow Articles by Ashton-Miller, J. A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, A. A
Right arrow Articles by Ashton-Miller, J. A
Submitted on February 15, 2006
Accepted on January 17, 2007

ON USE OF A NOMINAL INTERNAL MODEL TO DETECT A LOSS OF BALANCE IN A MAXIMAL FORWARD REACH

Alaa A Ahmed1 and James A Ashton-Miller1*

1 Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States; Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States; Institute of Gerontology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jaam{at}umich.edu.

We hypothesize that the central nervous system detects a loss of balance by comparing outputs predicted by a nominal, forward internal model with actual sensory outputs. When the resulting control error signal reaches an anomalously large value, this control error anomaly (CEA) signals a loss of balance and precedes any observable compensatory response. To test this hypothesis a multi-input, multi-output internal model of a standing forward reach task was developed which incorporated online model identification and a Gaussian failure detection algorithm. Eleven healthy young women were then asked to stand and reach forward to a target positioned from 95 to 125% of their maximum reach distance. Kinematic and kinetic data were recorded at 100 Hz unilaterally from the upper body, leg and foot. Evidence of successful CEA detection was a compensatory step between 100 ms and 2 s later. The results show that use of a threshold, set at three standard deviations from the mean, on error in the control of leg segment acceleration detected a CEA and correctly predicted a compensatory response in 92.6% of 108 trials. Leg acceleration control error was a better predictor than upper body or foot acceleration control error (P = 0.000). CEA detection performed more reliably than loss of balance detection algorithms based on kinematic thresholds (P = 0.000). The results support the hypothesis that a loss of balance may be identified via the use of a nominal forward internal model and probabilistic error monitoring.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2007 by the The American Physiological Society.