Optimal control predicts human performance on objects with internal degrees of freedom.

On a daily basis, humans interact with a vast range of objects and tools. A class of tasks, which can pose a serious challenge to our motor skills, are those that involve manipulating objects with internal degrees of freedom, such as when folding laundry or using a lasso. Here, we use the framework of optimal feedback control to make predictions of how humans should interact with such objects. We confirm the predictions experimentally in a two-dimensional object manipulation task, in which subjects learned to control six different objects with complex dynamics. We show that the non-intuitive behavior observed when controlling objects with internal degrees of freedom can be accounted for by a simple cost function representing a trade-off between effort and accuracy. In addition to using a simple linear, point-mass optimal control model, we also used an optimal control model, which considers the non-linear dynamics of the human arm. We find that the more realistic optimal control model captures aspects of the data that cannot be accounted for by the linear model or other previous theories of motor control. The results suggest that our everyday interactions with objects can be understood by optimality principles and advocate the use of more realistic optimal control models for the study of human motor neuroscience.

Motor learning.

Although learning a motor skill, such as a tennis stroke, feels like a unitary experience, researchers who study motor control and learning break the processes involved into a number of interacting components. These components can be organized into four main groups. First, skilled performance requires the effective and efficient gathering of sensory information, such as deciding where and when to direct one's gaze around the court, and thus an important component of skill acquisition involves learning how best to extract task-relevant information. Second, the performer must learn key features of the task such as the geometry and mechanics of the tennis racket and ball, the properties of the court surface, and how the wind affects the ball's flight. Third, the player needs to set up different classes of control that include predictive and reactive control mechanisms that generate appropriate motor commands to achieve the task goals, as well as compliance control that specifies, for example, the stiffness with which the arm holds the racket. Finally, the successful performer can learn higher-level skills such as anticipating and countering the opponent's strategy and making effective decisions about shot selection. In this Primer we shall consider these components of motor learning using as an example how we learn to play tennis.