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

P.I.P.P.I.: What has changed? How and why? The empirical evidence

This paper provides a summary of the results of the P.I.P.P.I. Program in achieving the prefixed goals on the final, intermediate and proximal outcome variables, regarding children\u2019s development, the positive exercise of parental competences and the effective action of services respectively. Therefore, the main purpose is to describe the impact of the program on the overall well-being of children and families in relation to the processes implemented. This is possible thanks to the wealth of information gathered by professionals through the tools provided for the analysis, design and monitoring activities in the work with families

Neural bases of hand synergies

The human hand has so many degrees of freedom that it may seem impossible to control. A potential solution to this problem is "synergy control" which combines dimensionality reduction with great flexibility. With applicability to a wide range of tasks, this has become a very popular concept. In this review, we describe the evolution of the modern concept using studies of kinematic and force synergies in human hand control, neurophysiology of cortical and spinal neurons, and electromyographic (EMG) activity of hand muscles. We go beyond the often purely descriptive usage of synergy by reviewing the organization of the underlying neuronal circuitry in order to propose mechanistic explanations for various observed synergy phenomena. Finally, we propose a theoretical framework to reconcile important and still debated concepts such as the definitions of "fixed" vs. "flexible" synergies and mechanisms underlying the combination of synergies for hand control

Effects of Visual Cues of Object Density on Perception and Anticipatory Control of Dexterous Manipulation

Anticipatory force planning during grasping is based on visual cues about the object’s physical properties and sensorimotor memories of previous actions with grasped objects. Vision can be used to estimate object mass based on the object size to identify and recall sensorimotor memories of previously manipulated objects. It is not known whether subjects can use density cues to identify the object’s center of mass (CM) and create compensatory moments in an anticipatory fashion during initial object lifts to prevent tilt. We asked subjects (n = 8) to estimate CM location of visually symmetric objects of uniform densities (plastic or brass, symmetric CM) and non-uniform densities (mixture of plastic and brass, asymmetric CM). We then asked whether subjects can use density cues to scale fingertip forces when lifting the visually symmetric objects of uniform and non-uniform densities. Subjects were able to accurately estimate an object’s center of mass based on visual density cues. When the mass distribution was uniform, subjects could scale their fingertip forces in an anticipatory fashion based on the estimation. However, despite their ability to explicitly estimate CM location when object density was non-uniform, subjects were unable to scale their fingertip forces to create a compensatory moment and prevent tilt on initial lifts. Hefting object parts in the hand before the experiment did not affect this ability. This suggests a dichotomy between the ability to accurately identify the object’s CM location for objects with non-uniform density cues and the ability to utilize this information to correctly scale their fingertip forces. These results are discussed in the context of possible neural mechanisms underlying sensorimotor integration linking visual cues and anticipatory control of grasping

Sensorimotor control of gait: a novel approach for the study of the interplay of visual and proprioceptive feedback

Sensorimotor control theories propose that the central nervous system exploits expected sensory consequences generated by motor commands for movement planning, as well as online sensory feedback for comparison with expected sensory feedback for monitoring and correcting, if needed, ongoing motor output. In our study, we tested this theoretical framework by quantifying the functional role of expected versus actual proprioceptive feedback for planning and regulation of gait in humans. We addressed this question by using a novel methodological approach to deliver fast perturbations of the walking surface stiffness, in conjunction with a virtual reality system that provided visual feedback of upcoming changes of surface stiffness. In the predictable experimental condition, we asked subjects to learn associating visual feedback of changes in floor stiffness (sand patch) during locomotion to quantify kinematic and kinetic changes in gait. In the unpredictable experimental condition, we perturbed floor stiffness at unpredictable instances during the gait to characterize the gait-phase dependent strategies in recovering the locomotor cycle. For the unpredictable conditions, visual feedback of changes in floor stiffness was absent or inconsistent with tactile and proprioceptive feedback. The investigation of these perturbation-induced effects on legs kinematics revealed that visual feedback of upcoming changes in floor stiffness allows for both early (preparatory) and late (post-perturbation) changes in leg kinematics. However, when proprioceptive feedback is not available, the early responses do not occur while the late responses are preserved although in a, slightly attenuated form. The methods proposed and the preliminary results of this study open new directions for the investigation of the relative role of visual, tactile, and proprioceptive feedback on gait control, with potential implications for designing novel robot-assisted gait rehabilitation approaches

Influence of force feedback on grasp force modulation in prosthetic applications: A preliminary study

In typical movement, humans use a combination of feed-forward and feedback motor control strategies to interact with the world around them. However, when sensory input is impaired or absent, as in the case of various neuropathies or amputation, the ability to perform everyday tasks, like modulating grip force to object weight, can be affected. In this study, we show the results of a preliminary study using a pressure cuff-like force feedback device (CUFF) with the SoftHand Pro (SHP) prosthetic hand. Subjects lifted an object of various weights using their own hand, with the SHP without feedback, and the SHP with force feedback. As expected, significant differences were found between the two SHP conditions and the native hand, but surprisingly not between the SHP conditions. A closer look at the data suggests the feedback may help diminish the overall grip force used during grasping even if it does not alter the grip force modulation to object weight. The lack of significance may be due in part to high intra- and inter-subject variability. Additional training with the CUFF and/or customization of the feedback may enhance the effects and warrants further stud

Visual Cues of Object Properties Differentially Affect Anticipatory Planning of Digit Forces and Placement

Studies on anticipatory planning of object manipulation showed initial task failure (i.e., object roll) when visual object shape cues are incongruent with other visual cues, such as weight distribution/density (e.g., symmetrically shaped object with an asymmetrical density). This suggests that shape cues override density cues. However, these studies typically only measured forces, with digit placement constrained. Recent evidence suggests that when digit placement is unconstrained, subjects modulate digit forces and placement. Thus, unconstrained digit placement might be modulated on initial trials (since it is an explicit process), but not forces (since it is an implicit process). We tested whether shape and density cues would differentially influence anticipatory planning of digit placement and forces during initial trials of a two-digit object manipulation task. Furthermore, we tested whether shape cues would override density cues when cues are incongruent. Subjects grasped and lifted an object with the aim of preventing roll. In Experiment 1, the object was symmetrically shaped, but with asymmetrical density (incongruent cues). In Experiment 2, the object was asymmetrical in shape and density (congruent cues). In Experiment 3, the object was asymmetrically shaped, but with symmetrical density (incongruent cues). Results showed differential modulation of digit placement and forces (modulation of load force but not placement), but only when shape and density cues were congruent. When shape and density cues were incongruent, we found collinear digit placement and symmetrical force sharing. This suggests that congruent and incongruent shape and density cues differentially influence anticipatory planning of digit forces and placement. Furthermore, shape cues do not always override density cues. A continuum of visual cues, such as those alluding to shape and density, need to be integrated

Generalization of Dexterous Manipulation Is Sensitive to the Frame of Reference in Which It Is Learned

Studies have shown that internal representations of manipulations of objects with asymmetric mass distributions that are generated within a specific orientation are not generalizable to novel orientations, i.e., subjects fail to prevent object roll on their first grasp-lift attempt of the object following 180° object rotation. This suggests that representations of these manipulations are specific to the reference frame in which they are formed. However, it is unknown whether that reference frame is specific to the hand, the body, or both, because rotating the object 180° modifies the relation between object and body as well as object and hand. An alternative, untested explanation for the above failure to generalize learned manipulations is that any rotation will disrupt grasp performance, regardless if the reference frame in which the manipulation was learned is maintained or modified. We examined the effect of rotations that (1) maintain and (2) modify relations between object and body, and object and hand, on the generalizability of learned two-digit manipulation of an object with an asymmetric mass distribution. Following rotations that maintained the relation between object and body and object and hand (e.g., rotating the object and subject 180°), subjects continued to use appropriate digit placement and load force distributions, thus generating sufficient compensatory moments to minimize object roll. In contrast, following rotations that modified the relation between (1) object and hand (e.g. rotating the hand around to the opposite object side), (2) object and body (e.g. rotating subject and hand 180°), or (3) both (e.g. rotating the subject 180°), subjects used the same, yet inappropriate digit placement and load force distribution, as those used prior to the rotation. Consequently, the compensatory moments were insufficient to prevent large object rolls. These findings suggest that representations of learned manipulation of objects with asymmetric mass distributions are specific to the body- and hand-reference frames in which they were learned

Learned Manipulation at Unconstrained Contacts Does Not Transfer across Hands

Recent studies about sensorimotor control of the human hand have focused on how dexterous manipulation is learned and generalized. Here we address this question by testing the extent to which learned manipulation can be transferred when the contralateral hand is used and/or object orientation is reversed. We asked subjects to use a precision grip to lift a grip device with an asymmetrical mass distribution while minimizing object roll during lifting by generating a compensatory torque. Subjects were allowed to grasp anywhere on the object’s vertical surfaces, and were therefore able to modulate both digit positions and forces. After every block of eight trials performed in one manipulation context (i.e., using the right hand and at a given object orientation), subjects had to lift the same object in the second context for one trial (transfer trial). Context changes were made by asking subjects to switch the hand used to lift the object and/or rotate the object 180° about a vertical axis. Therefore, three transfer conditions, hand switch (HS), object rotation (OR), and both hand switch and object rotation (HS+OR), were tested and compared with hand matched control groups who did not experience context changes. We found that subjects in all transfer conditions adapted digit positions across multiple transfer trials similar to the learning of control groups, regardless of different changes of contexts. Moreover, subjects in both HS and HS+OR group also adapted digit forces similar to the control group, suggesting independent learning of the left hand. In contrast, the OR group showed significant negative transfer of the compensatory torque due to an inability to adapt digit forces. Our results indicate that internal representations of dexterous manipulation tasks may be primarily built through the hand used for learning and cannot be transferred across hands

Sensorimotor uncertainty modulates corticospinal excitability during skilled object manipulation

Sensorimotor memory built through previous hand-object interactions allows subjects to plan grasp forces. The memory-based mechanism is particularly effective when contact points on the object do not change across multiple manipulations, thus allowing subjects to generate the same forces in a feedforward fashion. However, allowing subjects to choose where to grasp an object causes trial-to-trial variability in fingertip positioning, suggesting a decreased ability to predict where the object will be grasped. In this scenario, subjects modulate forces on a trial-to-trial basis as a function of fingertip positioning. We suggested that this fingertip force-to-position modulation could be implemented by transforming feedback of digit placement into an accurate distribution of fingertip forces. Thus, decreasing certainty of fingertip position on an object would cause a shift from predominantly memory- to feedback-based force control mechanisms. To gain further insight into these sensorimotor transformation mechanisms, we asked subjects to grasp and lift an object with an asymmetrical center of mass while preventing it from tilting. To isolate the effect of digit placement uncertainty, we designed two experimental conditions that differed in terms of predictability of fingertip position but had similar average fingertip positioning and force distribution. We measured corticospinal excitability to probe possible changes in sensorimotor processing associated with digit placement uncertainty. We found a differential effect of sensorimotor uncertainty after but not before object contact. Our results suggest that sensorimotor integration is rapidly tuned after object contact based on different processing demands for memory versus feedback mechanisms underlying the control of manipulative forces.National Science Foundation; BBSRC David Phillips fellowship (UK); Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek grant (Belgium