By using a newly designed high-performance manipulandum and a new estimation algorithm, we measured human multi-joint arm stiffness parameters during multi-joint point-to-point movements on a horizontal plane. This manipulandum allows us to apply a sufficient perturbation to subject's arm within a brief period during movement. Arm stiffness parameters were reliably estimated using a new algorithm, in which all unknown structural parameters could be estimated independent of arm posture (i.e., constant values under any arm posture). Arm stiffness during transverse movement was considerably greater than that during corresponding posture, but not during a longitudinal movement. Although the ratios of elbow, shoulder, and double-joint stiffness were varied in time, the orientation of stiffness ellipses during the movement did not change much. Equilibrium-point trajectories that were predicted from measured stiffness parameters and actual trajectories were slightly sinusoidally curved in Cartesian space and their velocity profiles were quite different from the velocity profiles of actual hand trajectories. This result contradicts the hypothesis that the brain does not take the dynamics into account in movement control depending on the neuromuscular servo mechanism; rather, it implies that the brain needs to acquire some internal models of controlled objects.

We propose a computationally coherent model of cerebellar motor learning based on the feedback-error-learning scheme. We assume that climbing fiber responses represent motor-command errors generated by some of the premotor networks such as the feedback controllers at the spinal-, brain stem- and cerebral levels. Thus, in our model, climbing fiber responses are considered to convey motor errors in the motor-command coordinates rather than in the sensory coordinates. Based on the long-term depression in Purkinje cells each corticonuclear microcomplex in different regions of the cerebellum learns to execute predictive and coordinative control of different types of movements. Ultimately, it acquires an inverse model of a specific controlled object and complements crude control by the premotor networks. This general model is developed in detail as a specific neural circuit model for the lateral hemisphere. A new experiment is suggested to elucidate the coordinate frame in which climbing fiber responses are represented.

Human arm viscoelasticity is important in stabilizing posture, movement, and in interacting with objects. Viscoelastic spatial characteristics are usually indexed by the size, shape, and orientation of a hand stiffness ellipse. It is well known that arm posture is a dominant factor in determining the properties of the stiffness ellipse. However, it is still unclear how much joint stiffness can change under different conditions, and the effects of that change on the spatial characteristics of hand stiffness are poorly examined. To investigate the dexterous control mechanisms of the human arm, we studied the controllability and spatial characteristics of viscoelastic properties of human multijoint arm during different cocontractions and force interactions in various directions and amplitudes in a horizontal plane. We found that different cocontraction ratios between shoulder and elbow joints can produce changes in the shape and orientation of the stiffness ellipse, especially at proximal hand positions. During force regulation tasks we found that shoulder and elbow single-joint stiffness was each roughly proportional to the torque of its own joint, and cross-joint stiffness was correlated with elbow torque. Similar tendencies were also found in the viscosity-torque relationships. As a result of the joint stiffness changes, the orientation and shape of the stiffness ellipses varied during force regulation tasks as well. Based on these observations, we consider why we can change the ellipse characteristics especially in the proximal posture. The present results suggest that humans control directional characteristics of hand stiffness by changing joint stiffness to achieve various interactions with objects.

In the field of motor control, two hypotheses have been controversial: whether the brain acquires internal models that generate accurate motor commands, or whether the brain avoids this by using the viscoelasticity of musculoskeletal system. Recent observations on relatively low stiffness during trained movements support the existence of internal models. However, no study has revealed the decrease in viscoelasticity associated with learning that would imply improvement of internal models as well as synergy between the two hypothetical mechanisms. Previously observed decreases in electromyogram (EMG) might have other explanations, such as trajectory modifications that reduce joint torques. To circumvent such complications, we required strict trajectory control and examined only successful trials having identical trajectory and torque profiles. Subjects were asked to perform a hand movement in unison with a target moving along a specified and unusual trajectory, with shoulder and elbow in the horizontal plane at the shoulder level. To evaluate joint viscoelasticity during the learning of this movement, we proposed an index of muscle co-contraction around the joint (IMCJ). The IMCJ was defined as the summation of the absolute values of antagonistic muscle torques around the joint and computed from the linear relation between surface EMG and joint torque. The IMCJ during isometric contraction, as well as during movements, was confirmed to correlate well with joint stiffness estimated using the conventional method, i.e., applying mechanical perturbations. Accordingly, the IMCJ during the learning of the movement was computed for each joint of each trial using estimated EMG-torque relationship. At the same time, the performance error for each trial was specified as the root mean square of the distance between the target and hand at each time step over the entire trajectory. The time-series data of IMCJ and performance error were decomposed into long-term components that showed decreases in IMCJ in accordance with learning with little change in the trajectory and short-term interactions between the IMCJ and performance error. A cross-correlation analysis and impulse responses both suggested that higher IMCJs follow poor performances, and lower IMCJs follow good performances within a few successive trials. Our results support the hypothesis that viscoelasticity contributes more when internal models are inaccurate, while internal models contribute more after the completion of learning. It is demonstrated that the CNS regulates viscoelasticity on a short- and long-term basis depending on performance error and finally acquires smooth and accurate movements while maintaining stability during the entire learning process.

For the last 20 years, it has been hypothesized that well-coordinated, multijoint movements are executed without complex computation by the brain, with the use of springlike muscle properties and peripheral neural feedback loops. However, it has been technically and conceptually difficult to examine this "equilibrium-point control" hypothesis directly in physiological or behavioral experiments. A high-performance manipulandum was developed and used here to measure human arm stiffness, the magnitude of which during multijoint movement is important for this hypothesis. Here, the equilibrium-point trajectory was estimated from the measured stiffness, the actual trajectory, and the generated torque. Its velocity profile differed from that of the actual trajectory. These results argue against the hypothesis that the brain sends as a motor command only an equilibrium-point trajectory similar to the actual trajectory.

Quantitative examinations of internal representations for arm trajectory planning: minimum commanded torque change model. A number of invariant features of multijoint planar reaching movements have been observed in measured hand trajectories. These features include roughly straight hand paths and bell-shaped speed profiles where the trajectory curvatures between transverse and radial movements have been found to be different. For quantitative and statistical investigations, we obtained a large amount of trajectory data within a wide range of the workspace in the horizontal and sagittal planes (400 trajectories for each subject). A pair of movements within the horizontal and sagittal planes was set to be equivalent in the elbow and shoulder flexion/extension. The trajectory curvatures of the corresponding pair in these planes were almost the same. Moreover, these curvatures can be accurately reproduced with a linear regression from the summation of rotations in the elbow and shoulder joints. This means that trajectory curvatures systematically depend on the movement location and direction represented in the intrinsic body coordinates. We then examined the following four candidates as planning spaces and the four corresponding computational models for trajectory planning. The candidates were as follows: the minimum hand jerk model in an extrinsic-kinematic space, the minimum angle jerk model in an intrinsic-kinematic space, the minimum torque change model in an intrinsic-dynamic-mechanical space, and the minimum commanded torque change model in an intrinsic-dynamic-neural space. The minimum commanded torque change model, which is proposed here as a computable version of the minimum motor command change model, reproduced actual trajectories best for curvature, position, velocity, acceleration, and torque. The model's prediction that the longer the duration of the movement the larger the trajectory curvature was also confirmed. Movements passing through via-points in the horizontal plane were also measured, and they converged to those predicted by the minimum commanded torque change model with training. Our results indicated that the brain may plan, and learn to plan, the optimal trajectory in the intrinsic coordinates considering arm and muscle dynamics and using representations for motor commands controlling muscle tensions.

Many lines of evidence suggest that the cerebellum is involved in motor control. But what features of these movements are encoded by cerebellar neurons? For slow-tracking eye movements, the activity of Purkinje cells in the ventral paraflocculus of the cerebellum is known to be correlated with eye velocity and acceleration. Here we show that the complex temporal pattern of the firing frequency that occurs during the ocular following response elicited by movements of a large visual scene can be reconstructed by an inverse-dynamics representation, which uses the position, velocity and acceleration of eye movements. Further analysis reveals that the velocity and acceleration components can provide appropriate dynamic drive signals to ocular motor neurons, whereas the position component often has the wrong polarity. We conclude that these Purkinje cells primarily contribute dynamic command signals.

Recent neuroscience studies have been concerned with how aimed movements are generated on the basis of target localization. However, visual information from the surroundings as well as from the target can influence arm motor control, in a manner similar to known effects in postural and ocular motor control. Here, we show an ultra-fast manual motor response directly induced by a large-field visual motion. This rapid response aided reaction when the subject moved his hand in the direction of visual motion, suggesting assistive visually evoked manual control during postural movement. The latency of muscle activity generating this response was as short as that of the ocular following responses to the visual motion. Abrupt visual motion entrained arm movement without affecting perceptual target localization, and the degrees of motion coherence and speed of the visual stimulus modulated this arm response. This visuomotor behavior was still observed when the visual motion was confined to the "follow-through" phase of a hitting movement, in which no target existed. An analysis of the arm movements suggests that the hitting follow through made by the subject is not a part of a reaching movement. Moreover, the arm response was systematically modulated by hand bias forces, suggesting that it results from a reflexive control mechanism. We therefore propose that its mechanism is radically distinct from motor control for aimed movements to a target. Rather, in an analogy with reflexive eye movement stabilizing a retinal image, we consider that this mechanism regulates arm movements in parallel with voluntary motor control.