Adaptive saccade controller inspired by the primates' cerebellum

Saccades are fast eye movements that allow humans and robots to bring the visual target in the center of the visual field. Saccades are open loop with respect to the vision system, thus their execution require a precise knowledge of the internal model of the oculomotor system. In this work, we modeled the saccade control, taking inspiration from the recurrent loops between the cerebellum and the brainstem. In this model, the brainstem acts as a fixed-inverse model of the oculomotor system, while the cerebellum acts as an adaptive element that learns the internal model of the oculomotor system. The adaptive filter is implemented using a state-of-the-art neural network, called I-SSGPR. The proposed approach, namely recurrent architecture, was validated through experiments performed both in simulation and on an antropomorphic robotic head. Moreover, we compared the recurrent architecture with another model of the cerebellum, the feedback error learning. Achieved results show that the recurrent architecture outperforms the feedback error learning in terms of accuracy and insensitivity to the choice of the feedback controller

Adaptive saccade controller inspired by the primates' cerebellum

Saccades are fast eye movements that allow humans and robots to bring the visual target in the center of the visual field. Saccades are open loop with respect to the vision system, thus their execution require a precise knowledge of the internal model of the oculomotor system. In this work, we modeled the saccade control, taking inspiration from the recurrent loops between the cerebellum and the brainstem. In this model, the brainstem acts as a fixed-inverse model of the oculomotor system, while the cerebellum acts as an adaptive element that learns the internal model of the oculomotor system. The adaptive filter is implemented using a state-of-the-art neural network, called I-SSGPR. The proposed approach, namely recurrent architecture, was validated through experiments performed both in simulation and on an antropomorphic robotic head. Moreover, we compared the recurrent architecture with another model of the cerebellum, the feedback error learning. Achieved results show that the recurrent architecture outperforms the feedback error learning in terms of accuracy and insensitivity to the choice of the feedback controller

Learning the visual–oculomotor transformation: effects on saccade control and space representation

Active eye movements can be exploited to build a visuomotor representation of the surrounding environment. Maintaining and improving such representation requires to update the internal model involved in the generation of eye movements. From this perspective, action and perception are thus tightly coupled and interdependent. In this work, we encoded the internal model for oculomotor control with an adaptive filter inspired by the functionality of the cerebellum. Recurrent loops between a feed-back controller and the internal model allow our system to perform accurate binocular saccades and create an implicit representation of the nearby space. Simulation results show that this recurrent architecture outperforms classical feedback-error-learning in terms of both accuracy and sensitivity to system parameters. The proposed approach was validated implementing the framework on an anthropomorphic robotic head

Gaze control modelling and robotic implementation

Although we have the impression that we can process the entire visual field in a single fixation, in reality we would be unable to fully process the information outside of foveal vision if we were unable to move our eyes. Because of acuity limitations in the retina, eye movements are necessary for processing the details of the array. Our ability to discriminate fine detail drops off markedly outside of the fovea in the parafovea (extending out to about 5 degrees on either side of fixation) and in the periphery (everything beyond the parafovea). While we are reading or searching a visual array for a target or simply looking at a new scene, our eyes move every 200-350 ms. These eye movements serve to move the fovea (the high resolution part of the retina encompassing 2 degrees at the centre of the visual field) to an area of interest in order to process it in greater detail. During the actual eye movement (or saccade), vision is suppressed and new information is acquired only during the fixation (the period of time when the eyes remain relatively still). While it is true that we can move our attention independently of where the eyes are fixated, it does not seem to be the case in everyday viewing. The separation between attention and fixation is often attained in very simple tasks; however, in tasks like reading, visual search, and scene perception, covert attention and overt attention (the exact eye location) are tightly linked. Because eye movements are essentially motor movements, it takes time to plan and execute a saccade. In addition, the end-point is pre-selected before the beginning of the movement. There is considerable evidence that the nature of the task influences eye movements. Depending on the task, there is considerable variability both in terms of fixation durations and saccade lengths. It is possible to outline five separate movement systems that put the fovea on a target and keep it there. Each of these movement systems shares the same effector pathway—the three bilateral groups of oculomotor neurons in the brain stem. These five systems include three that keep the fovea on a visual target in the environment and two that stabilize the eye during head movement. Saccadic eye movements shift the fovea rapidly to a visual target in the periphery. Smooth pursuit movements keep the image of a moving target on the fovea. Vergence movements move the eyes in opposite directions so that the image is positioned on both foveae. Vestibulo-ocular movements hold images still on the retina during brief head movements and are driven by signals from the vestibular system. Optokinetic movements hold images during sustained head rotation and are driven by visual stimuli. All eye movements but vergence movements are conjugate: each eye moves the same amount in the same direction. Vergence movements are disconjugate: The eyes move in different directions and sometimes by different amounts. Finally, there are times that the eye must stay still in the orbit so that it can examine a stationary object. Thus, a sixth system, the fixation system, holds the eye still during intent gaze. This requires active suppression of eye movement. Vision is most accurate when the eyes are still. When we look at an object of interest a neural system of fixation actively prevents the eyes from moving. The fixation system is not as active when we are doing something that does not require vision, for example, mental arithmetic. Our eyes explore the world in a series of active fixations connected by saccades. The purpose of the saccade is to move the eyes as quickly as possible. Saccades are highly stereotyped; they have a standard waveform with a single smooth increase and decrease of eye velocity. Saccades are extremely fast, occurring within a fraction of a second, at speeds up to 900°/s. Only the distance of the target from the fovea determines the velocity of a saccadic eye movement. We can change the amplitude and direction of our saccades voluntarily but we cannot change their velocities. Ordinarily there is no time for visual feedback to modify the course of the saccade; corrections to the direction of movement are made in successive saccades. Only fatigue, drugs, or pathological states can slow saccades. Accurate saccades can be made not only to visual targets but also to sounds, tactile stimuli, memories of locations in space, and even verbal commands (“look left”). The smooth pursuit system keeps the image of a moving target on the fovea by calculating how fast the target is moving and moving the eyes accordingly. The system requires a moving stimulus in order to calculate the proper eye velocity. Thus, a verbal command or an imagined stimulus cannot produce smooth pursuit. Smooth pursuit movements have a maximum velocity of about 100°/s, much slower than saccades. The saccadic and smooth pursuit systems have very different central control systems. A coherent integration of these different eye movements, together with the other movements, essentially corresponds to a gating-like effect on the brain areas controlled. The gaze control can be seen in a system that decides which action should be enabled and which should be inhibited and in another that improves the action performance when it is executed. It follows that the underlying guiding principle of the gaze control is the kind of stimuli that are presented to the system, by linking therefore the task that is going to be executed. This thesis aims at validating the strong relation between actions and gaze. In the first part a gaze controller has been studied and implemented in a robotic platform in order to understand the specific features of prediction and learning showed by the biological system. The eye movements integration opens the problem of the best action that should be selected when a new stimuli is presented. The action selection problem is solved by the basal ganglia brain structures that react to the different salience values of the environment. In the second part of this work the gaze behaviour has been studied during a locomotion task. The final objective is to show how the different tasks, such as the locomotion task, imply the salience values that drives the gaze

Learning the Optimal Control of Coordinated Eye and Head Movements

Various optimality principles have been proposed to explain the characteristics of coordinated eye and head movements during visual orienting behavior. At the same time, researchers have suggested several neural models to underly the generation of saccades, but these do not include online learning as a mechanism of optimization. Here, we suggest an open-loop neural controller with a local adaptation mechanism that minimizes a proposed cost function. Simulations show that the characteristics of coordinated eye and head movements generated by this model match the experimental data in many aspects, including the relationship between amplitude, duration and peak velocity in head-restrained and the relative contribution of eye and head to the total gaze shift in head-free conditions. Our model is a first step towards bringing together an optimality principle and an incremental local learning mechanism into a unified control scheme for coordinated eye and head movements

Visuomotor Coordination in Reach-To-Grasp Tasks: From Humans to Humanoids and Vice Versa

Understanding the principles involved in visually-based coordinated motor control is one of the most fundamental and most intriguing research problems across a number of areas, including psychology, neuroscience, computer vision and robotics. Not very much is known regarding computational functions that the central nervous system performs in order to provide a set of requirements for visually-driven reaching and grasping. Additionally, in spite of several decades of advances in the field, the abilities of humanoids to perform similar tasks are by far modest when needed to operate in unstructured and dynamically changing environments. More specifically, our first focus is understanding the principles involved in human visuomotor coordination. Not many behavioral studies considered visuomotor coordination in natural, unrestricted, head-free movements in complex scenarios such as obstacle avoidance. To fill this gap, we provide an assessment of visuomotor coordination when humans perform prehensile tasks with obstacle avoidance, an issue that has received far less attention. Namely, we quantify the relationships between the gaze and arm-hand systems, so as to inform robotic models, and we investigate how the presence of an obstacle modulates this pattern of correlations. Second, to complement these observations, we provide a robotic model of visuomotor coordination, with and without the presence of obstacles in the workspace. The parameters of the controller are solely estimated by using the human motion capture data from our human study. This controller has a number of interesting properties. It provides an efficient way to control the gaze, arm and hand movements in a stable and coordinated manner. When facing perturbations while reaching and grasping, our controller adapts its behavior almost instantly, while preserving coordination between the gaze, arm, and hand. In the third part of the thesis, we study the neuroscientific literature of the primates. We here stress the view that the cerebellum uses the cortical reference frame representation. The cerebellum by taking into account this representation performs closed-loop programming of multi-joint movements and movement synchronization between the eye-head system, arm and hand. Based on this investigation, we propose a functional architecture of the cerebellar-cortical involvement. We derive a number of improvements of our visuomotor controller for obstacle-free reaching and grasping. Because this model is devised by carefully taking into account the neuroscientific evidence, we are able to provide a number of testable predictions about the functions of the central nervous system in visuomotor coordination. Finally, we tackle the flow of the visuomotor coordination in the direction from the arm-hand system to the visual system. We develop two models of motor-primed attention for humanoid robots. Motor-priming of attention is a mechanism that implements prioritizing of visual processing with respect to motor-relevant parts of the visual field. Recent studies in humans and monkeys have shown that visual attention supporting natural behavior is not exclusively defined in terms of visual saliency in color or texture cues, rather the reachable space and motor plans present the predominant source of this attentional modulation. Here, we show that motor-priming of visual attention can be used to efficiently distribute robot's computational resources devoted to visual processing

Binocular coordination of eye movements – Hering’s Law of equal innervation or uniocular control?

The neurophysiological basis for binocular control of eye movements in primates has been characterized by a scientific controversy that has its origin in the historical conflict of Hering and Helmholtz in the 19th century. This review focuses on two hypotheses, linked to that conflict, that seek to account for binocular coordination – Hering’s Law vs. uniocular control of each eye. In an effort to manage the length of the review, the focus is on extracellular single‐unit studies of premotor eye movement cells and extraocular motoneurons. In the latter half of the 20th century, these studies provided a wealth of neurophysiological data pertaining to the control of vergence and conjugate eye movements. The data were initially supportive of Hering’s Law. More recent data, however, have provided support for uniocular control of each eye consistent with Helmholtz’s original idea. The controversy is far from resolved. New anatomical descriptions of the disparate inputs to multiply and singly innervated extraocular muscle fibers challenge the concept of a ‘final common pathway’ as they suggest there may be separate groups of motoneurons involved in vergence and conjugate control of eye position. These data provide a new challenge for interpretation of uniocular premotor control networks and how they cooperate to produce coordinated eye movements.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86996/1/j.1460-9568.2011.07695.x.pd