Decomposition of a sensory prediction error signal for visuomotor adaptation.

Abstract

To accomplish effective motor control, the brain contains an internal forward model that predicts the expected sensory consequence of a motor command. When this prediction is inaccurate, a sensory prediction error is produced which adapts the forward model to make more accurate predictions of future movements. Other types of errors, such as task performance errors or reward, play less of a role in adapting a forward model. This raises the following question: What unique information is conveyed by the sensory prediction error that results in forward model adaptation? sensory prediction errors typically contain both the magnitude and direction of the error, but it is unclear if both components are necessary for adaptation or a single component is sufficient. In this article, we address this by having participants learn to counter a visuomotor rotation, which induces an angular mismatch between movements of the hand and visual feedback. We manipulated the information content of the visual feedback, in the form of a line, which accurately represented only the magnitude (distance), direction, or both magnitude and direction, of the virtual cursor relative to the target. We demonstrate that sensorimotor adaptation does not occur, or is minimal, when feedback is limited to information about the magnitude of an error. In contrast, sensorimotor adaptation is present when feedback is limited only to the direction of an error or when it contains combined direction and magnitude information. This result stands in contrast to current computational models of cerebellar-based sensorimotor adaptation that use error magnitude to drive adaptation. (PsycINFO Database Record

Greater neural responses to trajectory errors are associated with superior force field adaptation in older adults

“…Task errors can drive the changes in motor commands needed to increase task success following some forms of sensorimotor perturbation (e.g. Izawa & Shadmehr, 2011;Nikooyan & Ahmed, 2015;Taylor et al, 2013), but trajectory errors seem pivotal for automatic recalibration of sensorimotor transformations (Butcher & Taylor, 2017;Izawa & Shadmehr, 2011;Shadmehr et al, 2010). Our…”

Implicit visuomotor adaptation remains limited after several days of training

“…The difference between the intended movement (explicit re-aiming) and the actual reach direction reveals any learning of which the subject was unaware (implicit adaptation). These trial-by-trial assays have been extensively validated against traditional measures of implicit adaptation through direct comparison (Taylor and Ivry, 2011;Taylor et al, 2014), and convergent evidence (Poh and Taylor 2016;Butcher and Taylor 2018;Poh and Taylor 2019;McDougle and Taylor 2019). Given the advantages of disassociating explicit and implicit learning on a trial-by-trial basis, we adopted a reaiming procedure for our experiments.…”

“…An additional complication to long-term motor learning, not considered in Experiment One, is the directional nature of implicit adaptation. Several studies have revealed that the key factor to the development of implicit adaptation is the direction of the perturbation, as opposed to the size of the perturbation Thoroughman 2006, 2007;Wei and Kording, 2009;Semrau, Daitch, and Thoroughman, 2012;Morehead et al 2017;Butcher and Taylor, 2018). The implicit response to directional information appears to be automatic: the motor system automatically adapts in a direction opposite to the perturbation even when such adaptation is task-irrelevant (Schaefer, Shelly, andThoroughman, 2012, Morehead et al 2017;Butcher and Taylor, 2018).…”

“…Several studies have revealed that the key factor to the development of implicit adaptation is the direction of the perturbation, as opposed to the size of the perturbation Thoroughman 2006, 2007;Wei and Kording, 2009;Semrau, Daitch, and Thoroughman, 2012;Morehead et al 2017;Butcher and Taylor, 2018). The implicit response to directional information appears to be automatic: the motor system automatically adapts in a direction opposite to the perturbation even when such adaptation is task-irrelevant (Schaefer, Shelly, andThoroughman, 2012, Morehead et al 2017;Butcher and Taylor, 2018). This automatic response to directional information has led researchers to question the role that implicit adaptation might play in visuomotor mirror reversal tasks (Gritsenko and Kalaska, 2010;Lillicrap et al, 2013;Telgen, Parvin, and Diedrichsen, 2014;.…”

A State Space Model of a Visuomotor Rotation Experiment

“…8 show results from numerical simulations demonstrating that our model generates the first seven dynamic behaviors. For all simulations the model parameters are fixed as follows: K 1 = −1/10, K 2 = 1, and G 1 = −2.…”