IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1002465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimization of Muscle Activity for Task-Level Goals Predicts Complex Changes in Limb Forces across Biomechanical Contexts

Author

Listed:
  • J Lucas McKay
  • Lena H Ting

Abstract

Optimality principles have been proposed as a general framework for understanding motor control in animals and humans largely based on their ability to predict general features movement in idealized motor tasks. However, generalizing these concepts past proof-of-principle to understand the neuromechanical transformation from task-level control to detailed execution-level muscle activity and forces during behaviorally-relevant motor tasks has proved difficult. In an unrestrained balance task in cats, we demonstrate that achieving task-level constraints center of mass forces and moments while minimizing control effort predicts detailed patterns of muscle activity and ground reaction forces in an anatomically-realistic musculoskeletal model. Whereas optimization is typically used to resolve redundancy at a single level of the motor hierarchy, we simultaneously resolved redundancy across both muscles and limbs and directly compared predictions to experimental measures across multiple perturbation directions that elicit different intra- and interlimb coordination patterns. Further, although some candidate task-level variables and cost functions generated indistinguishable predictions in a single biomechanical context, we identified a common optimization framework that could predict up to 48 experimental conditions per animal (n = 3) across both perturbation directions and different biomechanical contexts created by altering animals' postural configuration. Predictions were further improved by imposing experimentally-derived muscle synergy constraints, suggesting additional task variables or costs that may be relevant to the neural control of balance. These results suggested that reduced-dimension neural control mechanisms such as muscle synergies can achieve similar kinetics to the optimal solution, but with increased control effort (≈2×) compared to individual muscle control. Our results are consistent with the idea that hierarchical, task-level neural control mechanisms previously associated with voluntary tasks may also be used in automatic brainstem-mediated pathways for balance. Author Summary: The nervous system has the ability to rapidly and flexibly coordinate many muscles and limbs to produce movements. This neuromechanical transformation must robustly achieve motor goals under the changing mechanics of the body and environment, and select one solution amongst many alternatives. What computational principles govern such decisions? Although optimality principles have predicted features of biological movement in simple models, here we show that this computational principle can robustly predict detailed experimental measures in an unrestrained, whole-body balance task. Detailed patterns of muscle activity and forces across multiple movement directions and body configurations were predicted based on interactions between musculoskeletal mechanics of the limbs, and task-level neural strategy of controlling the CoM mechanics while minimizing control effort. Moreover, similar muscle activity and forces were generated when muscles were coupled together in groups called muscle synergies, reducing the number of independent variables that are controlled. Our work is consistent with the idea that the nervous system may learn to coordinate muscles and limbs by minimizing effort in producing natural movements, and may use approximate solutions based on muscle synergies. Understanding such neural mechanisms may allow us to predict the effects of neural injury and disease on motor function.

Suggested Citation

  • J Lucas McKay & Lena H Ting, 2012. "Optimization of Muscle Activity for Task-Level Goals Predicts Complex Changes in Limb Forces across Biomechanical Contexts," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-17, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1002465
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002465
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002465&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002465?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manoj Srinivasan & Andy Ruina, 2006. "Computer optimization of a minimal biped model discovers walking and running," Nature, Nature, vol. 439(7072), pages 72-75, January.
    2. Etienne Burdet & Rieko Osu & David W. Franklin & Theodore E. Milner & Mitsuo Kawato, 2001. "The central nervous system stabilizes unstable dynamics by learning optimal impedance," Nature, Nature, vol. 414(6862), pages 446-449, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hossein Ehsani & Mostafa Rostami & Mohammad Gudarzi, 2016. "A general-purpose framework to simulate musculoskeletal system of human body: using a motion tracking approach," Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 306-319, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ian S Howard & David W Franklin, 2015. "Neural Tuning Functions Underlie Both Generalization and Interference," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Jack Brookes & Faisal Mushtaq & Earle Jamieson & Aaron J Fath & Geoffrey Bingham & Peter Culmer & Richard M Wilkie & Mark Mon-Williams, 2020. "Exploring disturbance as a force for good in motor learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Siddhartha Bikram Panday & Prabhat Pathak & Jeheon Moon & Dohoon Koo, 2022. "Complexity of Running and Its Relationship with Joint Kinematics during a Prolonged Run," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Ashesh Vasalya & Gowrishankar Ganesh & Abderrahmane Kheddar, 2018. "More than just co-workers: Presence of humanoid robot co-worker influences human performance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
    5. Nidhi Seethapathi & Barrett C. Clark & Manoj Srinivasan, 2024. "Exploration-based learning of a stabilizing controller predicts locomotor adaptation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Bastien Berret & Frédéric Jean, 2020. "Stochastic optimal open-loop control as a theory of force and impedance planning via muscle co-contraction," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-28, February.
    7. Nathanaël Jarrassé & Themistoklis Charalambous & Etienne Burdet, 2012. "A Framework to Describe, Analyze and Generate Interactive Motor Behaviors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-13, November.
    8. Bastien Berret & Adrien Conessa & Nicolas Schweighofer & Etienne Burdet, 2021. "Stochastic optimal feedforward-feedback control determines timing and variability of arm movements with or without vision," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-24, June.
    9. Jonathan B Dingwell & Joseph P Cusumano, 2019. "Humans use multi-objective control to regulate lateral foot placement when walking," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-28, March.
    10. Aldo Faisal & Dietrich Stout & Jan Apel & Bruce Bradley, 2010. "The Manipulative Complexity of Lower Paleolithic Stone Toolmaking," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(11), pages 1-11, November.
    11. Ahalya Prabhakar & Todd Murphey, 2022. "Mechanical intelligence for learning embodied sensor-object relationships," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-8, December.
    12. Frédéric Crevecoeur & Stephen H Scott, 2013. "Priors Engaged in Long-Latency Responses to Mechanical Perturbations Suggest a Rapid Update in State Estimation," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Jonathan B Dingwell & Joby John & Joseph P Cusumano, 2010. "Do Humans Optimally Exploit Redundancy to Control Step Variability in Walking?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-15, July.
    14. Abdelhamid Kadiallah & David W Franklin & Etienne Burdet, 2012. "Generalization in Adaptation to Stable and Unstable Dynamics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-11, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1002465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.