Probabilistic Models of Motor Production

N. Bernstein defined the ability of the central neural system (CNS) to control many degrees of freedom of a physical body with all its redundancy and flexibility as the main problem in motor control. He pointed at that man-made mechanisms usually have one, sometimes two degrees of freedom (DOF); when the number of DOF increases further, it becomes prohibitively hard to control them. The brain, however, seems to perform such control effortlessly. He suggested the way the brain might deal with it: when a motor skill is being acquired, the brain artificially limits the degrees of freedoms, leaving only one or two. As the skill level increases, the brain gradually "frees" the previously fixed DOF, applying control when needed and in directions which have to be corrected, eventually arriving to the control scheme where all the DOF are "free". This approach of reducing the dimensionality of motor control remains relevant even today. One the possibles solutions of the Bernstetin's problem is the hypothesis of motor primitives (MPs) - small building blocks that constitute complex movements and facilitite motor learnirng and task completion. Just like in the visual system, having a homogenious hierarchical architecture built of similar computational elements may be beneficial. Studying such a complicated object as brain, it is important to define at which level of details one works and which questions one aims to answer. David Marr suggested three levels of analysis: 1. computational, analysing which problem the system solves; 2. algorithmic, questioning which representation the system uses and which computations it performs; 3. implementational, finding how such computations are performed by neurons in the brain. In this thesis we stay at the first two levels, seeking for the basic representation of motor output. In this work we present a new model of motor primitives that comprises multiple interacting latent dynamical systems, and give it a full Bayesian treatment. Modelling within the Bayesian framework, in my opinion, must become the new standard in hypothesis testing in neuroscience. Only the Bayesian framework gives us guarantees when dealing with the inevitable plethora of hidden variables and uncertainty. The special type of coupling of dynamical systems we proposed, based on the Product of Experts, has many natural interpretations in the Bayesian framework. If the dynamical systems run in parallel, it yields Bayesian cue integration. If they are organized hierarchically due to serial coupling, we get hierarchical priors over the dynamics. If one of the dynamical systems represents sensory state, we arrive to the sensory-motor primitives. The compact representation that follows from the variational treatment allows learning of a motor primitives library. Learned separately, combined motion can be represented as a matrix of coupling values. We performed a set of experiments to compare different models of motor primitives. In a series of 2-alternative forced choice (2AFC) experiments participants were discriminating natural and synthesised movements, thus running a graphics Turing test. When available, Bayesian model score predicted the naturalness of the perceived movements. For simple movements, like walking, Bayesian model comparison and psychophysics tests indicate that one dynamical system is sufficient to describe the data. For more complex movements, like walking and waving, motion can be better represented as a set of coupled dynamical systems. We also experimentally confirmed that Bayesian treatment of model learning on motion data is superior to the simple point estimate of latent parameters. Experiments with non-periodic movements show that they do not benefit from more complex latent dynamics, despite having high kinematic complexity. By having a fully Bayesian models, we could quantitatively disentangle the influence of motion dynamics and pose on the perception of naturalness. We confirmed that rich and correct dynamics is more important than the kinematic representation. There are numerous further directions of research. In the models we devised, for multiple parts, even though the latent dynamics was factorized on a set of interacting systems, the kinematic parts were completely independent. Thus, interaction between the kinematic parts could be mediated only by the latent dynamics interactions. A more flexible model would allow a dense interaction on the kinematic level too. Another important problem relates to the representation of time in Markov chains. Discrete time Markov chains form an approximation to continuous dynamics. As time step is assumed to be fixed, we face with the problem of time step selection. Time is also not a explicit parameter in Markov chains. This also prohibits explicit optimization of time as parameter and reasoning (inference) about it. For example, in optimal control boundary conditions are usually set at exact time points, which is not an ecological scenario, where time is usually a parameter of optimization. Making time an explicit parameter in dynamics may alleviate this

On Neuromechanical Approaches for the Study of Biological Grasp and Manipulation

Biological and robotic grasp and manipulation are undeniably similar at the level of mechanical task performance. However, their underlying fundamental biological vs. engineering mechanisms are, by definition, dramatically different and can even be antithetical. Even our approach to each is diametrically opposite: inductive science for the study of biological systems vs. engineering synthesis for the design and construction of robotic systems. The past 20 years have seen several conceptual advances in both fields and the quest to unify them. Chief among them is the reluctant recognition that their underlying fundamental mechanisms may actually share limited common ground, while exhibiting many fundamental differences. This recognition is particularly liberating because it allows us to resolve and move beyond multiple paradoxes and contradictions that arose from the initial reasonable assumption of a large common ground. Here, we begin by introducing the perspective of neuromechanics, which emphasizes that real-world behavior emerges from the intimate interactions among the physical structure of the system, the mechanical requirements of a task, the feasible neural control actions to produce it, and the ability of the neuromuscular system to adapt through interactions with the environment. This allows us to articulate a succinct overview of a few salient conceptual paradoxes and contradictions regarding under-determined vs. over-determined mechanics, under- vs. over-actuated control, prescribed vs. emergent function, learning vs. implementation vs. adaptation, prescriptive vs. descriptive synergies, and optimal vs. habitual performance. We conclude by presenting open questions and suggesting directions for future research. We hope this frank assessment of the state-of-the-art will encourage and guide these communities to continue to interact and make progress in these important areas

Probabilistic Models of Motor Production

N. Bernstein defined the ability of the central neural system (CNS) to control many degrees of freedom of a physical body with all its redundancy and flexibility as the main problem in motor control. He pointed at that man-made mechanisms usually have one, sometimes two degrees of freedom (DOF); when the number of DOF increases further, it becomes prohibitively hard to control them. The brain, however, seems to perform such control effortlessly. He suggested the way the brain might deal with it: when a motor skill is being acquired, the brain artificially limits the degrees of freedoms, leaving only one or two. As the skill level increases, the brain gradually "frees" the previously fixed DOF, applying control when needed and in directions which have to be corrected, eventually arriving to the control scheme where all the DOF are "free". This approach of reducing the dimensionality of motor control remains relevant even today. One the possibles solutions of the Bernstetin's problem is the hypothesis of motor primitives (MPs) - small building blocks that constitute complex movements and facilitite motor learnirng and task completion. Just like in the visual system, having a homogenious hierarchical architecture built of similar computational elements may be beneficial. Studying such a complicated object as brain, it is important to define at which level of details one works and which questions one aims to answer. David Marr suggested three levels of analysis: 1. computational, analysing which problem the system solves; 2. algorithmic, questioning which representation the system uses and which computations it performs; 3. implementational, finding how such computations are performed by neurons in the brain. In this thesis we stay at the first two levels, seeking for the basic representation of motor output. In this work we present a new model of motor primitives that comprises multiple interacting latent dynamical systems, and give it a full Bayesian treatment. Modelling within the Bayesian framework, in my opinion, must become the new standard in hypothesis testing in neuroscience. Only the Bayesian framework gives us guarantees when dealing with the inevitable plethora of hidden variables and uncertainty. The special type of coupling of dynamical systems we proposed, based on the Product of Experts, has many natural interpretations in the Bayesian framework. If the dynamical systems run in parallel, it yields Bayesian cue integration. If they are organized hierarchically due to serial coupling, we get hierarchical priors over the dynamics. If one of the dynamical systems represents sensory state, we arrive to the sensory-motor primitives. The compact representation that follows from the variational treatment allows learning of a motor primitives library. Learned separately, combined motion can be represented as a matrix of coupling values. We performed a set of experiments to compare different models of motor primitives. In a series of 2-alternative forced choice (2AFC) experiments participants were discriminating natural and synthesised movements, thus running a graphics Turing test. When available, Bayesian model score predicted the naturalness of the perceived movements. For simple movements, like walking, Bayesian model comparison and psychophysics tests indicate that one dynamical system is sufficient to describe the data. For more complex movements, like walking and waving, motion can be better represented as a set of coupled dynamical systems. We also experimentally confirmed that Bayesian treatment of model learning on motion data is superior to the simple point estimate of latent parameters. Experiments with non-periodic movements show that they do not benefit from more complex latent dynamics, despite having high kinematic complexity. By having a fully Bayesian models, we could quantitatively disentangle the influence of motion dynamics and pose on the perception of naturalness. We confirmed that rich and correct dynamics is more important than the kinematic representation. There are numerous further directions of research. In the models we devised, for multiple parts, even though the latent dynamics was factorized on a set of interacting systems, the kinematic parts were completely independent. Thus, interaction between the kinematic parts could be mediated only by the latent dynamics interactions. A more flexible model would allow a dense interaction on the kinematic level too. Another important problem relates to the representation of time in Markov chains. Discrete time Markov chains form an approximation to continuous dynamics. As time step is assumed to be fixed, we face with the problem of time step selection. Time is also not a explicit parameter in Markov chains. This also prohibits explicit optimization of time as parameter and reasoning (inference) about it. For example, in optimal control boundary conditions are usually set at exact time points, which is not an ecological scenario, where time is usually a parameter of optimization. Making time an explicit parameter in dynamics may alleviate this

Evidence for sparse synergies in grasping actions

Converging evidence shows that hand-actions are controlled at the level of synergies and not single muscles. One intriguing aspect of synergy-based action-representation is that it may be intrinsically sparse and the same synergies can be shared across several distinct types of hand-actions. Here, adopting a normative angle, we consider three hypotheses for hand-action optimal-control: sparse-combination hypothesis (SC) – sparsity in the mapping between synergies and actions - i.e., actions implemented using a sparse combination of synergies; sparse-elements hypothesis (SE) – sparsity in synergy representation – i.e., the mapping between degrees-of-freedom (DoF) and synergies is sparse; double-sparsity hypothesis (DS) – a novel view combining both SC and SE – i.e., both the mapping between DoF and synergies and between synergies and actions are sparse, each action implementing a sparse combination of synergies (as in SC), each using a limited set of DoFs (as in SE). We evaluate these hypotheses using hand kinematic data from six human subjects performing nine different types of reach-to-grasp actions. Our results support DS, suggesting that the best action representation is based on a relatively large set of synergies, each involving a reduced number of degrees-of-freedom, and that distinct sets of synergies may be involved in distinct tasks

On neuromechanical approaches for the study of biological and robotic grasp and manipulation

abstract: Biological and robotic grasp and manipulation are undeniably similar at the level of mechanical task performance. However, their underlying fundamental biological vs. engineering mechanisms are, by definition, dramatically different and can even be antithetical. Even our approach to each is diametrically opposite: inductive science for the study of biological systems vs. engineering synthesis for the design and construction of robotic systems. The past 20 years have seen several conceptual advances in both fields and the quest to unify them. Chief among them is the reluctant recognition that their underlying fundamental mechanisms may actually share limited common ground, while exhibiting many fundamental differences. This recognition is particularly liberating because it allows us to resolve and move beyond multiple paradoxes and contradictions that arose from the initial reasonable assumption of a large common ground. Here, we begin by introducing the perspective of neuromechanics, which emphasizes that real-world behavior emerges from the intimate interactions among the physical structure of the system, the mechanical requirements of a task, the feasible neural control actions to produce it, and the ability of the neuromuscular system to adapt through interactions with the environment. This allows us to articulate a succinct overview of a few salient conceptual paradoxes and contradictions regarding under-determined vs. over-determined mechanics, under- vs. over-actuated control, prescribed vs. emergent function, learning vs. implementation vs. adaptation, prescriptive vs. descriptive synergies, and optimal vs. habitual performance. We conclude by presenting open questions and suggesting directions for future research. We hope this frank and open-minded assessment of the state-of-the-art will encourage and guide these communities to continue to interact and make progress in these important areas at the interface of neuromechanics, neuroscience, rehabilitation and robotics.The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-017-0305-

Perception of Human Movement Based on Modular Movement Primitives

People can identify and understand human movement from very degraded visual information without effort. A few dots representing the position of the joints are enough to induce a vivid and stable percept of the underlying movement. Due to this ability, the realistic animation of 3D characters requires great skill. Studying the constituents of movement that looks natural would not only help these artists, but also bring better understanding of the underlying information processing in the brain. Analogous to the hurdles in animation, the efforts of roboticists reflect the complexity of motion production: controlling the many degrees of freedom of a body requires time-consuming computations. Modularity is one strategy to address this problem: Complex movement can be decomposed into simple primitives. A few primitives can conversely be used to compose a large number of movements. Many types of movement primitives (MPs) have been proposed on different levels of information processing hierarchy in the brain. MPs have mostly been proposed for movement production. Yet, modularity based on primitives might similarly enable robust movement perception. For my thesis, I have conducted perceptual experiments based on the assumption of a shared representation of perception and action based on MPs. The three different types of MPs I have investigated are temporal MPs (TMP), dynamical MPs (DMP), and coupled Gaussian process dynamical models (cGPDM). The MP-models have been trained on natural movements to generate new movements. I then perceptually validated these artificial movements in different psychophysical experiments. In all experiments I used a two-alternative forced choice paradigm, in which human observers were presented a movement based on motion-capturing data, and one generated by an MP-model. They were then asked to chose the movement which they perceived as more natural. In the first experiment I investigated walking movements, and found that, in line with previous results, faithful representation of movement dynamics is more important than good reconstruction of pose. In the second experiment I investigated the role of prediction in perception using reaching movements. Here, I found that perceived naturalness of the predictions is similar to the perceived naturalness of movements itself obtained in the first experiment. I have found that MP models are able to produce movement that looks natural, with the TMP achieving the highest perceptual scores as well highest predictiveness of perceived naturalness among the three model classes, suggesting their suitability for a shared representation of perception and action

Motion representation with spiking neural networks for grasping and manipulation

Die Natur bedient sich Millionen von Jahren der Evolution, um adaptive physikalische Systeme mit effizienten Steuerungsstrategien zu erzeugen. Im Gegensatz zur konventionellen Robotik plant der Mensch nicht einfach eine Bewegung und führt sie aus, sondern es gibt eine Kombination aus mehreren Regelkreisen, die zusammenarbeiten, um den Arm zu bewegen und ein Objekt mit der Hand zu greifen. Mit der Forschung an humanoiden und biologisch inspirierten Robotern werden komplexe kinematische Strukturen und komplizierte Aktor- und Sensorsysteme entwickelt. Diese Systeme sind schwierig zu steuern und zu programmieren, und die klassischen Methoden der Robotik können deren Stärken nicht immer optimal ausnutzen. Die neurowissenschaftliche Forschung hat große Fortschritte beim Verständnis der verschiedenen Gehirnregionen und ihrer entsprechenden Funktionen gemacht. Dennoch basieren die meisten Modelle auf groß angelegten Simulationen, die sich auf die Reproduktion der Konnektivität und der statistischen neuronalen Aktivität konzentrieren. Dies öffnet eine Lücke bei der Anwendung verschiedener Paradigmen, um Gehirnmechanismen und Lernprinzipien zu validieren und Funktionsmodelle zur Steuerung von Robotern zu entwickeln. Ein vielversprechendes Paradigma ist die ereignis-basierte Berechnung mit SNNs. SNNs fokussieren sich auf die biologischen Aspekte von Neuronen und replizieren deren Arbeitsweise. Sie sind für spike- basierte Kommunikation ausgelegt und ermöglichen die Erforschung von Mechanismen des Gehirns für das Lernen mittels neuronaler Plastizität. Spike-basierte Kommunikation nutzt hoch parallelisierten Hardware-Optimierungen mittels neuromorpher Chips, die einen geringen Energieverbrauch und schnelle lokale Operationen ermöglichen. In dieser Arbeit werden verschiedene SNNs zur Durchführung von Bewegungss- teuerung für Manipulations- und Greifaufgaben mit einem Roboterarm und einer anthropomorphen Hand vorgestellt. Diese basieren auf biologisch inspirierten funktionalen Modellen des menschlichen Gehirns. Ein Motor-Primitiv wird auf parametrische Weise mit einem Aktivierungsparameter und einer Abbildungsfunktion auf die Roboterkinematik übertragen. Die Topologie des SNNs spiegelt die kinematische Struktur des Roboters wider. Die Steuerung des Roboters erfolgt über das Joint Position Interface. Um komplexe Bewegungen und Verhaltensweisen modellieren zu können, werden die Primitive in verschiedenen Schichten einer Hierarchie angeordnet. Dies ermöglicht die Kombination und Parametrisierung der Primitiven und die Wiederverwendung von einfachen Primitiven für verschiedene Bewegungen. Es gibt verschiedene Aktivierungsmechanismen für den Parameter, der ein Motorprimitiv steuert — willkürliche, rhythmische und reflexartige. Außerdem bestehen verschiedene Möglichkeiten neue Motorprimitive entweder online oder offline zu lernen. Die Bewegung kann entweder als Funktion modelliert oder durch Imitation der menschlichen Ausführung gelernt werden. Die SNNs können in andere Steuerungssysteme integriert oder mit anderen SNNs kombiniert werden. Die Berechnung der inversen Kinematik oder die Validierung von Konfigurationen für die Planung ist nicht erforderlich, da der Motorprimitivraum nur durchführbare Bewegungen hat und keine ungültigen Konfigurationen enthält. Für die Evaluierung wurden folgende Szenarien betrachtet, das Zeigen auf verschiedene Ziele, das Verfolgen einer Trajektorie, das Ausführen von rhythmischen oder sich wiederholenden Bewegungen, das Ausführen von Reflexen und das Greifen von einfachen Objekten. Zusätzlich werden die Modelle des Arms und der Hand kombiniert und erweitert, um die mehrbeinige Fortbewegung als Anwendungsfall der Steuerungsarchitektur mit Motorprimitiven zu modellieren. Als Anwendungen für einen Arm (3 DoFs) wurden die Erzeugung von Zeigebewegungen und das perzeptionsgetriebene Erreichen von Zielen modelliert. Zur Erzeugung von Zeigebewegun- gen wurde ein Basisprimitiv, das auf den Mittelpunkt einer Ebene zeigt, offline mit vier Korrekturprimitiven kombiniert, die eine neue Trajektorie erzeugen. Für das wahrnehmungsgesteuerte Erreichen eines Ziels werden drei Primitive online kombiniert unter Verwendung eines Zielsignals. Als Anwendungen für eine Fünf-Finger-Hand (9 DoFs) wurden individuelle Finger-aktivierungen und Soft-Grasping mit nachgiebiger Steuerung modelliert. Die Greif- bewegungen werden mit Motor-Primitiven in einer Hierarchie modelliert, wobei die Finger-Primitive die Synergien zwischen den Gelenken und die Hand-Primitive die unterschiedlichen Affordanzen zur Koordination der Finger darstellen. Für jeden Finger werden zwei Reflexe hinzugefügt, zum Aktivieren oder Stoppen der Bewegung bei Kontakt und zum Aktivieren der nachgiebigen Steuerung. Dieser Ansatz bietet enorme Flexibilität, da Motorprimitive wiederverwendet, parametrisiert und auf unterschiedliche Weise kombiniert werden können. Neue Primitive können definiert oder gelernt werden. Ein wichtiger Aspekt dieser Arbeit ist, dass im Gegensatz zu Deep Learning und End-to-End-Lernmethoden, keine umfangreichen Datensätze benötigt werden, um neue Bewegungen zu lernen. Durch die Verwendung von Motorprimitiven kann der gleiche Modellierungsansatz für verschiedene Roboter verwendet werden, indem die Abbildung der Primitive auf die Roboterkinematik neu definiert wird. Die Experimente zeigen, dass durch Motor- primitive die Motorsteuerung für die Manipulation, das Greifen und die Lokomotion vereinfacht werden kann. SNNs für Robotikanwendungen ist immer noch ein Diskussionspunkt. Es gibt keinen State-of-the-Art-Lernalgorithmus, es gibt kein Framework ähnlich dem für Deep Learning, und die Parametrisierung von SNNs ist eine Kunst. Nichtsdestotrotz können Robotikanwendungen - wie Manipulation und Greifen - Benchmarks und realistische Szenarien liefern, um neurowissenschaftliche Modelle zu validieren. Außerdem kann die Robotik die Möglichkeiten der ereignis- basierten Berechnung mit SNNs und neuromorpher Hardware nutzen. Die physikalis- che Nachbildung eines biologischen Systems, das vollständig mit SNNs implementiert und auf echten Robotern evaluiert wurde, kann neue Erkenntnisse darüber liefern, wie der Mensch die Motorsteuerung und Sensorverarbeitung durchführt und wie diese in der Robotik angewendet werden können. Modellfreie Bewegungssteuerungen, inspiriert von den Mechanismen des menschlichen Gehirns, können die Programmierung von Robotern verbessern, indem sie die Steuerung adaptiver und flexibler machen

Respiratory, postural and spatio-kinetic motor stabilization, internal models, top-down timed motor coordination and expanded cerebello-cerebral circuitry: a review

Human dexterity, bipedality, and song/speech vocalization in Homo are reviewed within a motor evolution perspective in regard to 

(i) brain expansion in cerebello-cerebral circuitry, 
(ii) enhanced predictive internal modeling of body kinematics, body kinetics and action organization, 
(iii) motor mastery due to prolonged practice, 
(iv) task-determined top-down, and accurately timed feedforward motor adjustment of multiple-body/artifact elements, and 
(v) reduction in automatic preflex/spinal reflex mechanisms that would otherwise restrict such top-down processes. 

Dual-task interference and developmental neuroimaging research argues that such internal modeling based motor capabilities are concomitant with the evolution of 
(vi) enhanced attentional, executive function and other high-level cognitive processes, and that 
(vii) these provide dexterity, bipedality and vocalization with effector nonspecific neural resources. 

The possibility is also raised that such neural resources could 
(viii) underlie human internal model based nonmotor cognitions. 
&#xa