Switched reluctance motor drive without direct rotor position sensing

A closed-loop control technique based on monitoring phase current risetime for switched reluctance (SR) motors without direct rotor-position sensors has been studied and implemented successfully. In this technique the variation in incremental phase inductance in a SR motor is used to detect rotor position. A control circuit for current-waveform-based rotor position detection has been implemented using hard-wire digital circuits. Torque-speed and system-efficiency characteristics resulting from the application of the method to a 4-kW, four-phase SR motor with an IGBT drive are presented.

Impedance control reduces instability that arises from motor noise.

There is ample evidence that humans are able to control the endpoint impedance of their arms in response to active destabilizing force fields. However, such fields are uncommon in daily life. Here, we examine whether the CNS selectively controls the endpoint impedance of the arm in the absence of active force fields but in the presence of instability arising from task geometry and signal-dependent noise (SDN) in the neuromuscular system. Subjects were required to generate forces, in two orthogonal directions, onto four differently curved rigid objects simulated by a robotic manipulandum. The endpoint stiffness of the limb was estimated for each object curvature. With increasing curvature, the endpoint stiffness increased mainly parallel to the object surface and to a lesser extent in the orthogonal direction. Therefore, the orientation of the stiffness ellipses did not orient to the direction of instability. Simulations showed that the observed stiffness geometries and their pattern of change with instability are the result of a tradeoff between maximizing the mechanical stability and minimizing the destabilizing effects of SDN. Therefore, it would have been suboptimal to align the stiffness ellipse in the direction of instability. The time course of the changes in stiffness geometry suggests that modulation takes place both within and across trials. Our results show that an increase in stiffness relative to the increase in noise can be sufficient to reduce kinematic variability, thereby allowing stiffness control to improve stability in natural tasks.

Motor task variation induces structural learning.

When we have learned a motor skill, such as cycling or ice-skating, we can rapidly generalize to novel tasks, such as motorcycling or rollerblading [1-8]. Such facilitation of learning could arise through two distinct mechanisms by which the motor system might adjust its control parameters. First, fast learning could simply be a consequence of the proximity of the original and final settings of the control parameters. Second, by structural learning [9-14], the motor system could constrain the parameter adjustments to conform to the control parameters' covariance structure. Thus, facilitation of learning would rely on the novel task parameters' lying on the structure of a lower-dimensional subspace that can be explored more efficiently. To test between these two hypotheses, we exposed subjects to randomly varying visuomotor tasks of fixed structure. Although such randomly varying tasks are thought to prevent learning, we show that when subsequently presented with novel tasks, subjects exhibit three key features of structural learning: facilitated learning of tasks with the same structure, strong reduction in interference normally observed when switching between tasks that require opposite control strategies, and preferential exploration along the learned structure. These results suggest that skill generalization relies on task variation and structural learning.

Near optimal combination of sensory and motor uncertainty in time during a naturalistic perception-action task.

Most behavioral tasks have time constraints for successful completion, such as catching a ball in flight. Many of these tasks require trading off the time allocated to perception and action, especially when only one of the two is possible at any time. In general, the longer we perceive, the smaller the uncertainty in perceptual estimates. However, a longer perception phase leaves less time for action, which results in less precise movements. Here we examine subjects catching a virtual ball. Critically, as soon as subjects began to move, the ball became invisible. We study how subjects trade-off sensory and movement uncertainty by deciding when to initiate their actions. We formulate this task in a probabilistic framework and show that subjects' decisions when to start moving are statistically near optimal given their individual sensory and motor uncertainties. Moreover, we accurately predict individual subject's task performance. Thus we show that subjects in a natural task are quantitatively aware of how sensory and motor variability depend on time and act so as to minimize overall task variability.

Separate representations of dynamics in rhythmic and discrete movements: evidence from motor learning.

Rhythmic and discrete arm movements occur ubiquitously in everyday life, and there is a debate as to whether these two classes of movements arise from the same or different underlying neural mechanisms. Here we examine interference in a motor-learning paradigm to test whether rhythmic and discrete movements employ at least partially separate neural representations. Subjects were required to make circular movements of their right hand while they were exposed to a velocity-dependent force field that perturbed the circularity of the movement path. The direction of the force-field perturbation reversed at the end of each block of 20 revolutions. When subjects made only rhythmic or only discrete circular movements, interference was observed when switching between the two opposing force fields. However, when subjects alternated between blocks of rhythmic and discrete movements, such that each was uniquely associated with one of the perturbation directions, interference was significantly reduced. Only in this case did subjects learn to corepresent the two opposing perturbations, suggesting that different neural resources were employed for the two movement types. Our results provide further evidence that rhythmic and discrete movements employ at least partially separate control mechanisms in the motor system.

Nash equilibria in multi-agent motor interactions.

Social interactions in classic cognitive games like the ultimatum game or the prisoner's dilemma typically lead to Nash equilibria when multiple competitive decision makers with perfect knowledge select optimal strategies. However, in evolutionary game theory it has been shown that Nash equilibria can also arise as attractors in dynamical systems that can describe, for example, the population dynamics of microorganisms. Similar to such evolutionary dynamics, we find that Nash equilibria arise naturally in motor interactions in which players vie for control and try to minimize effort. When confronted with sensorimotor interaction tasks that correspond to the classical prisoner's dilemma and the rope-pulling game, two-player motor interactions led predominantly to Nash solutions. In contrast, when a single player took both roles, playing the sensorimotor game bimanually, cooperative solutions were found. Our methodology opens up a new avenue for the study of human motor interactions within a game theoretic framework, suggesting that the coupling of motor systems can lead to game theoretic solutions.

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.