JN Miami Valley Hospital
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (January 3, 2007). doi:10.1152/jn.00897.2006
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
97/4/3057    most recent
00897.2006v1
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cheng, S.
Right arrow Articles by Sabes, P. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cheng, S.
Right arrow Articles by Sabes, P. N.
Submitted on August 22, 2006
Accepted on December 16, 2006

Calibration of visually-guided reaching is driven by error corrective learning and internal dynamics

Sen Cheng1 and Philip N. Sabes2*

1 Physiology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States
2 University of California San Francisco, United States

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: sabes{at}phy.ucsf.edu.

The sensorimotor calibration of visually-guided reaching changes on a trial-to-trial basis in response to random shifts in the visual feedback of the hand. We show that a simple linear dynamical system is sufficient to model the dynamics of this adaptive process. In this model, an internal variable represents the current state of sensorimotor calibration. Changes in this state are driven by error feedback signals, which consist of the visually perceived reach error, the artificial shift in visual feedback, or both. Subjects correct for at least 20% of the error observed on each movement, despite being unaware of the visual shift. The state of adaptation is also driven by internal dynamics, consisting of a decay back to a baseline state and a "state noise" process. State noise includes any source of variability that directly affects the state of adaptation, such as variability in sensory feedback processing, the computations that drive learning, or the maintenance of the state. This noise is accumulated in the state across trials, creating temporal correlations in the sequence of reach errors. These correlations allow us to distinguish state noise from sensorimotor performance noise, which arises independently on each trial from random fluctuations in the sensorimotor pathway. We show that these two noise sources contribute comparably to the overall magnitude of movement variability. Finally, the dynamics of adaptation measured with random feedback shifts generalizes to the case of constant feedback shifts, allowing for a direct comparison of our results with more traditional blocked-exposure experiments.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
M. C. Simani, L. M. M. McGuire, and P. N. Sabes
Visual-Shift Adaptation Is Composed of Separable Sensory and Task-Dependent Effects
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2007; 98(5): 2827 - 2841.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




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