nips nips2005 nips2005-136 nips2005-136-reference knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining

136 nips-2005-Noise and the two-thirds power Law


Source: pdf

Author: Uri Maoz, Elon Portugaly, Tamar Flash, Yair Weiss

Abstract: The two-thirds power law, an empirical law stating an inverse non-linear relationship between the tangential hand speed and the curvature of its trajectory during curved motion, is widely acknowledged to be an invariant of upper-limb movement. It has also been shown to exist in eyemotion, locomotion and was even demonstrated in motion perception and prediction. This ubiquity has fostered various attempts to uncover the origins of this empirical relationship. In these it was generally attributed either to smoothness in hand- or joint-space or to the result of mechanisms that damp noise inherent in the motor system to produce the smooth trajectories evident in healthy human motion. We show here that white Gaussian noise also obeys this power-law. Analysis of signal and noise combinations shows that trajectories that were synthetically created not to comply with the power-law are transformed to power-law compliant ones after combination with low levels of noise. Furthermore, there exist colored noise types that drive non-power-law trajectories to power-law compliance and are not affected by smoothing. These results suggest caution when running experiments aimed at verifying the power-law or assuming its underlying existence without proper analysis of the noise. Our results could also suggest that the power-law might be derived not from smoothness or smoothness-inducing mechanisms operating on the noise inherent in our motor system but rather from the correlated noise which is inherent in this motor system. 1


reference text

[1] F. Lacquaniti, C. Terzuolo, and P. Viviani. The law relating kinematic and figural aspects of drawing movements. Acta Psychologica, 54:115–130, 1983.

[2] P. Viviani. Do units of motor action really exist. Experimental Brain Research, 15:201–216, 1986.

[3] P. Viviani and M. Cenzato. Segmentation and coupling in complex movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(6):828–845, 1985.

[4] P. Viviani and R. Schneider. A developmental study of the relationship between geometry and kinematics in drawing movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17:198–218, 1991.

[5] J. T. Massey, J. T. Lurito, G. Pellizzer, and A. P. Georgopoulos. Three-dimensional drawings in isometric conditions: relation between geometry and kinematics. Experimental Brain Research, 88(3):685–690, 1992.

[6] A. B. Schwartz. Direct cortical representation of drawing. Science, 265(5171):540–542, 1994.

[7] C. deSperati and P. Viviani. The relationship between curvature and velocity in two dimensional smooth pursuit eye movement. The Journal of Neuroscience, 17(10):3932–3945, 1997.

[8] P. Viviani and N. Stucchi. Biological movements look uniform: evidence of motor perceptual interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3):603–626, 1992.

[9] P. Viviani, G. Baud Bovoy, and M. Redolfi. Perceiving and tracking kinesthetic stimuli: further evidence of motor perceptual interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23(4):1232–1252, 1997.

[10] S. Kandel, J. Orliaguet, and P. Viviani. Perceptual anticipation in handwriting: The role of implicit motor competence. Perception and Psychophysics, 62(4):706–716, 2000.

[11] S. Vieilledent, Y. Kerlirzin, S. Dalbera, and A. Berthoz. Relationship between velocity and curvature of a human locomotor trajectory. Neuroscience Letters, 305(1):65–69, 2001.

[12] C. M. Harris and D. M. Wolpert. Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning. Nature, 394(6695):780–784, 1998.

[13] P. Viviani and T. Flash. Minimum-jerk, two-thirds power law, and isochrony: converging approaches to movement planning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(1):32–53, 1995.

[14] M. J. Richardson and T. Flash. Comparing smooth arm movements with the two-thirds power law and the related segmented-control hypothesis. Journal of Neuroscience, 22(18):8201–8211, 2002.

[15] E. Todorov and M. Jordan. Smoothness maximization along a predefined path accurately predicts the speed profiles of complex arm movements. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80(2):696– 714, 1998.

[16] S. Schaal and D. Sternad. Origins and violations of the 2/3 power law in rhythmic threedimensional arm movements. Experimental Brain Research, 136(1):60–72, 2001.

[17] A. A. Handzel and T. Flash. Geometric methods in the study of human motor control. Cognitive Studies, 6:1–13, 1999.

[18] F. E. Pollick and G. Sapiro. Constant affine velocity predicts the 1/3 power law of planar motion perception and generation. Vision Research, 37(3):347–353, 1997.

[19] J. Oprea. Differential geometry and its applications. Prentice-Hall, 1997.

[20] U. Maoz and T. Flash. Power-laws of three-dimensional movement. Unpublished manuscript.

[21] P. L. Gribble and D. J. Ostry. Origins of the power law relation between movement velocity and curvature: modeling the effects of muscle mechanics and limb dynamics. Journal of Neurophysiology, 76:2853–2860, 1996.