Target Uncertainty Mediates Sensorimotor Error Correction

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 12; no. 1; p. e0170466
• Main Authors: Acerbi, Luigi, Vijayakumar, Sethu, Wolpert, Daniel M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 27.01.2017; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Adaptation; Adult; Bayes Theorem; Bayesian analysis; Behavior; Biology and Life Sciences; Center of mass; Commands; Computer and Information Sciences; Control systems; Decision making; Decision theory; Earth Sciences; Engineering and Technology; Error correction; Error correction & detection; Error detection; Estimates; Feedback; Feedback control; Feedback, Sensory - physiology; Female; Fingers; Humans; Informatics; Male; Mathematical models; Medicine and Health Sciences; Movement - physiology; Neurosciences; Objectives; Perceptual-motor processes; Physical Sciences; Physiological aspects; Psychomotor Performance - physiology; Research and Analysis Methods; Sensorimotor system; Social Sciences; Stochasticity; Studies; Uncertainty analysis; Visual perception; United States; United Kingdom
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170466

Human movements are prone to errors that arise from inaccuracies in both our perceptual processing and execution of motor commands. We can reduce such errors by both improving our estimates of the state of the world and through online error correction of the ongoing action. Two prominent frameworks that explain how humans solve these problems are Bayesian estimation and stochastic optimal feedback control. Here we examine the interaction between estimation and control by asking if uncertainty in estimates affects how subjects correct for errors that may arise during the movement. Unbeknownst to participants, we randomly shifted the visual feedback of their finger position as they reached to indicate the center of mass of an object. Even though participants were given ample time to compensate for this perturbation, they only fully corrected for the induced error on trials with low uncertainty about center of mass, with correction only partial in trials involving more uncertainty. The analysis of subjects' scores revealed that participants corrected for errors just enough to avoid significant decrease in their overall scores, in agreement with the minimal intervention principle of optimal feedback control. We explain this behavior with a term in the loss function that accounts for the additional effort of adjusting one's response. By suggesting that subjects' decision uncertainty, as reflected in their posterior distribution, is a major factor in determining how their sensorimotor system responds to error, our findings support theoretical models in which the decision making and control processes are fully integrated.