zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

A biomechanical inactivation principle. (English) Zbl 1218.92012
Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 268, 93-116 (2010) and Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklova 268, 100-123 (2010).
This paper is concerned with the mathematical side of the theory of inactivations in human biomechanics and addresses the question whether motor planning is optimal according to an identifiable criterion. In other words, the following inverse optimal control problem is posed: given recorded experimental data, infer a cost function with regard to which the observed behavior is optimal. In contrast to known methods, the authors suggest a new approach to optimal control problems which starts from the observation of simultaneous inactivations of opposing muscles during movements presumed as optimal. Using the Pontryagin maximum principle and transversality arguments from differential topology, it is proved that the minimization of a nonsmooth cost is a necessary condition to obtain inactivation phases along optimal trajectories. The periods of silence in the activation of muscles that are observed in practice during the motions of the arm can appear only if “energy expenditure” is minimized. On the other hand, minimization of a criterion accounting for “energy expenditure” ensures, for sufficiently short movements, existence of such periods of silence. Consequently, it is established that inactivation is a kind of necessary and sufficient conditions for the minimization of an absolute-work-like cost. The theory has been validated by practical experiments, including zero-gravity experiments.

92C10 Biomechanics
49J15 Existence theories for optimal control problems involving ordinary differential equations
49N90 Applications of optimal control and differential games
Full Text: DOI
[1] W. Abend, E. Bizzi, and P. Morasso, ”Human Arm Trajectory Formation,” Brain 105(Part 2), 331–348 (1982). · doi:10.1093/brain/105.2.331
[2] C. G. Atkeson and J. M. Hollerbach, ”Kinematic Features of Unrestrained Vertical Arm Movements,” J. Neurosci. 5(9), 2318–2330 (1985).
[3] S. Ben-Itzhak and A. Karniel, ”Minimum Acceleration Criterion with Constraints Implies Bang-Bang Control as an Underlying Principle for Optimal Trajectories of Arm Reaching Movements,” Neural Comput. 20(3), 779–812 (2008). · Zbl 1235.49041 · doi:10.1162/neco.2007.12-05-077
[4] N. Bernstein, The Co-ordination and Regulation of Movements (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1967).
[5] B. Berret, C. Darlot, F. Jean, T. Pozzo, C. Papaxanthis, and J.-P. Gauthier, ”The Inactivation Principle: Mathematical Solutions Minimizing the Absolute Work and Biological Implications for the Planning of Arm Movements,” PLoS Comput. Biol. 4(10), e1000194 (2008). · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000194
[6] B. Berret, J.-P. Gauthier, and C. Papaxanthis, ”How Humans Control Arm Movements,” Tr. Mat. Inst. im. V.A. Steklova, Ross. Akad. Nauk 261, 47–60 (2008) [Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 261, 44–58 (2008)]. · Zbl 1236.93012
[7] J. J. Boessenkool, E. J. Nijhof, and C. J. Erkelens, ”A Comparison of Curvatures of Left and Right Hand Movements in a Simple Pointing Task,” Exp. Brain Res. 120(3), 369–376 (1998). · doi:10.1007/s002210050410
[8] B. Bonnard, ”Invariants in the Feedback Classification of Nonlinear Systems,” in New Trends in Nonlinear Control Theory (Springer, Berlin, 1989), Lect. Notes Control Inf. Sci. 122, pp. 13–22.
[9] S. Boyd, L. E. Ghaoui, E. Feron, and V. Balakrishnan, Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1994), SIAM Stud. Appl. Math. 15. · Zbl 0816.93004
[10] F. H. Clarke, Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis (J. Wiley and Sons, New York, 1983). · Zbl 0582.49001
[11] T. Flash and N. Hogan, ”The Coordination of Arm Movements: An Experimentally Confirmed Mathematical Model,” J. Neurosci. 5(7), 1688–1703 (1985).
[12] J.-P. Gauthier and I. Kupka, Deterministic Observation Theory and Applications (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2001). · Zbl 0990.93001
[13] J.-P. Gauthier and V. Zakalyukin, ”On the One-Step-Bracket-Generating Motion Planning Problem,” J. Dyn. Control Syst. 11, 215–235 (2005). · Zbl 1069.53032 · doi:10.1007/s10883-005-4171-0
[14] R. Gentili, V. Cahouet, and C. Papaxanthis, ”Motor Planning of Arm Movements Is Direction-Dependent in the Gravity Field,” Neuroscience 145(1), 20–32 (2007). · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.11.035
[15] E. Guigon, P. Baraduc, and M. Desmurget, ”Computational Motor Control: Redundancy and Invariance,” J. Neurophysiol. 97(1), 331–347 (2007). · doi:10.1152/jn.00290.2006
[16] M. Hallett and C. D. Marsden, ”Ballistic Flexion Movements of the Human Thumb,” J. Physiol. 294, 33–50 (1979). · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1979.sp012913
[17] C. M. Harris and D. M. Wolpert, ”Signal-Dependent Noise Determines Motor Planning,” Nature 394, 780–784 (1998). · doi:10.1038/29528
[18] F. Hermens and S. Gielen, ”Posture-Based or Trajectory-Based Movement Planning: A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Pointing Movements,” Exp. Brain Res. 159(3), 340–348 (2004). · doi:10.1007/s00221-004-1959-1
[19] M. J. Hollerbach and T. Flash, ”Dynamic Interactions between Limb Segments during Planar Arm Movement,” Biol. Cybern. 44(1), 67–77 (1982). · doi:10.1007/BF00353957
[20] R. Kalman, ”When Is a Linear Control System Optimal?,” Trans. ASME, Ser. D: J. Basic Eng. 86, 51–60 (1964). · doi:10.1115/1.3653115
[21] E. B. Lee and L. Markus, Foundations of Optimal Control Theory (J. Wiley and Sons, New York, 1967).
[22] P. Morasso, ”Spatial Control of Arm Movements,” Exp. Brain Res. 42(2), 223–227 (1981). · doi:10.1007/BF00236911
[23] A. Y. Ng and S. Russell, ”Algorithms for Inverse Reinforcement Learning,” in Proc. 17th Int. Conf. on Machine Learning (Morgan Kaufmann Publ., San Francisco, CA, 2000), pp. 663–670.
[24] J. Nishii and T. Murakami, ”Energetic Optimality of Arm Trajectory,” in Proc. Int. Conf. on Biomechanics of Man (Charles Univ., Prague, 2002), pp. 30–33.
[25] K. C. Nishikawa, S. T. Murray, and M. Flanders, ”Do Arm Postures Vary with the Speed of Reaching?,” J. Neurophysiol. 81(5), 2582–2586 (1999). · doi:10.1152/jn.1999.81.5.2582
[26] C. Papaxanthis, T. Pozzo, and M. Schieppati, ”Trajectories of Arm Pointing Movements on the Sagittal Plane Vary with both Direction and Speed,” Exp. Brain Res. 148(4), 498–503 (2003). · doi:10.1007/s00221-002-1327-y
[27] C. Papaxanthis, T. Pozzo, and P. Stapley, ”Effects of Movement Direction upon Kinematic Characteristics of Vertical Arm Pointing Movements in Man,” Neurosci. Lett. 253(2), 103–106 (1998). · doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(98)00604-1
[28] L. S. Pontryagin, V. G. Boltyanskii, R. V. Gamkrelidze, and E. F. Mishchenko, The Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes (Fizmatgiz, Moscow, 1961; Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1964).
[29] J. F. Soechting, ”Effect of Target Size on Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of a Pointing Movement in Man,” Exp. Brain Res. 54(1), 121–132 (1984). · doi:10.1007/BF00235824
[30] J. F. Soechting and F. Lacquaniti, ”Invariant Characteristics of a Pointing Movement in Man,” J. Neurosci. 1(7), 710–720 (1981).
[31] E. Todorov, ”Optimal Control Theory,” in Bayesian Brain: Probabilistic Approaches to Neural Coding, Ed. by K. Doya et al. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007), Ch. 12, pp. 269–298.
[32] Y. Uno, M. Kawato, and R. Suzuki, ”Formation and Control of Optimal Trajectory in Human Multijoint Arm Movement. Minimum Torque-Change Model,” Biol. Cybern. 61(2), 89–101 (1989). · doi:10.1007/BF00204593
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.