To control targeted movements, such as reaching to grasp an object or hammering a nail, the brain can use divers sources of sensory information, such as vision and proprioception. Although a variety of studies have shown that sensory signals are optimally combined according to principles of maximum likelihood, increasing evidence indicates that the CNS does not compute a single, optimal estimation of the target's position to be compared with a single optimal estimation of the hand. Rather, it employs a more modular approach in which the overall behavior is built by computing multiple concurrent comparisons carried out simultaneously in a number of different reference frames. The results of these individual comparisons are then optimally combined in order to drive the hand. In this article we examine at a computational level two formulations of concurrent models for sensory integration and compare this to the more conventional model of converging multi-sensory signals. Through a review of published studies, both our own and those performed by others, we produce evidence favoring the concurrent formulations. We then examine in detail the effects of additive signal noise as information flows through the sensorimotor system. By taking into account the noise added by sensorimotor transformations, one can explain why the CNS may shift its reliance on one sensory modality toward a greater reliance on another and investigate under what conditions those sensory transformations occur. Careful consideration of how transformed signals will co-vary with the original source also provides insight into how the CNS chooses one sensory modality over another. These concepts can be used to explain why the CNS might, for instance, create a visual representation of a task that is otherwise limited to the kinesthetic domain (e.g., pointing with one hand to a finger on the other) and why the CNS might choose to recode sensory information in an external reference frame.

When aligning the hand to grasp an object, the CNS combines multiple sensory inputs encoded in multiple reference frames. Previous studies suggest that when a direct comparison of target and hand is possible via a single sensory modality, the CNS avoids performing unnecessary coordinate transformations that add noise. But when target and hand do not share a common sensory modality (e.g., aligning the unseen hand to a visual target), at least one coordinate transformation is required. Similarly, body movements may occur between target acquisition and manual response, requiring that egocentric target information be updated or transformed to external reference frames to compensate. Here, we asked subjects to align the hand to an external target, where the target could be presented visually or kinesthetically and feedback about the hand was visual, kinesthetic, or both. We used a novel technique of imposing conflict between external visual and gravito-kinesthetic reference frames when subjects tilted the head during an instructed memory delay. By comparing experimental results to analytical models based on principles of maximum likelihood, we showed that multiple transformations above the strict minimum may be performed, but only if the task precludes a unimodal comparison of egocentric target and hand information. Thus, for cross-modal tasks, or when head movements are involved, the CNS creates and uses both kinesthetic and visual representations. We conclude that the necessity of producing at least one coordinate transformation activates multiple, concurrent internal representations, the functionality of which depends on the alignment of the head with respect to gravity.