Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

KIN 330 > final > Flashcards

final Flashcards

1
Q

forward model

A

simulates behavior of the body in response to motor commands and captures causal relationship b/t action and consequence
-“predictor”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

inverse model

A

simulates behavior of the motor apparatus and estimates motor commands required to achieve a desired state in advance of the movement and based on current state and corollary discharge
“controller”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

describe internal model as part of a mechanism for internal feedback loops

A
  • forward dynamic model provides a constant closed loop feedback system for online adjustment
  • together with the inverse model
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

predictive and anticipatory control in terms of forward model

A
  • predictor (forward model) uses the efference copy to predict the sensory feedback, which allows for anticipatory control of things like grip control
  • eg ketchup
  • prediction happens due to sensory delay which would be reactive control
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

sensory confirmation and cancellation in terms of forward model

A
  • sensory signals from the environment during movement are compared to the predicted signals that the forward model predictor predicts from the efference copy
  • if they match, the signal is interpreted as reafferent
  • if they do not match, it is interpreted as exafferent information
  • eg why external stimulation is more intense than self-produce
  • but anything that disrupts this comparison (rotation of robot, delay of stimulus) can create a mismatch again in signals
  • eg self produced force matching is inaccurate b/c you cancel out some of the feedback and have to create more force to feel it on your finger
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

internal forward model and action agency

A
  • ability to distinguish an action as self-produced based on comparison of afference to efference copy
  • eg schizophrenia patients have symptoms where they are not the agent of their own control
  • could be due to a. generating inadequate internal predictions or b. impaired comparison of predicted and actual
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

reafference principle/internal model at the single neuron level

A

recorded from vestibular afferents in monkeys

  • no difference b/t active and passive movements
  • vestibular signal not attenuated on the single neuron level during active movement
  • when recording from vestibular nuclei, there was a attenuation of the signal for head movements
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

vestibular signals during head movements

A

-active: vestibular signal is attenuated
passive head movement: codes for movement
-simultaneous passive and active movements: proprioception and vestibular afferent signal compared to reafference in vestibular nuclei
-active movement if vestibular attenuation, passive if no attenuation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

how is an internal model updated for learning?

A
  • brain learns to expect unexpected signals
  • monkeys introduced to unexpected signal (causes error of attribution) over learning trials supressed the vestibular signal more and more
  • internal model is reclaibrated
  • after effect shown when unexpected signal removed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

explain how the CNS determines whether a muscle is actively engaged in balance

A

it does if the efference copy of the motor command is congruent w/ the sensory signals

  • is a balance response when congruent
    a. active balancing vs. b. passive balancing where robot does for you
  • subject doesn’t know they aren’t actually balancing, so this is unconsciously controlled
  • when it’s passive movement, the signals are incongruent w/motor response (because of robot) so there’s no balance response
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

division 1 of visual streams

A

1st: what vs. where
what=inferior temporal, where=post. parietal
-distinction is based on stimulus features
-both based on conscious perception
-how the stimulus is processed is important

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

division 2 of visual streams

A
  • what vs. how
  • ventral (inferior temporal)=what, dorsal (post. parietal)=how
  • visual processing for online control of action
  • separate systems to serve visual perception and action
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

eg of same info different visual system

A
  • use info about shape and size to know it’s a remote
  • also to know how to pick it up and how to shape the hand to grasp it
  • what vs. how
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

blindsight

A

“seeing” what you can’t see

  • evidence in monkeys w/visual cortex lesion
  • they could still avoid objects and grasp objects and moving objects
  • ie this is mediated through subcortical pathways
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

dorsal vs. ventral streams

A

both streams go through the visual cortex, ventral goes to inferior occipitotemporal cortex and dorsal to post. parietal

  • ventral responsible for object recognition (textures, orientation, etc.)-conscious
  • dorsal responsible for spatial recognition (depth perception, location, on-line actions)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

evidence for what/how division

A

patient DF-visual agnosia w/ventral stream damage

  • unable to recognize size and orientation of objects
  • but preserved dorsal stream
    posting: can’t accurately orient card for slot but can put it in the mail slot
  • can’t estimate size of objects by matching hand size but can go out and grab the object
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Patient RV

A
  • damage to dorsal stream (PPC)
  • interrupted visuomotor processing for visually guided actions
  • optic ataxia-can’t reach for obects accurately
  • can recognize objects, can describe orientation of slot
  • cannot draw well b/c uses visual info , can’t put card in slot
  • grip aperture perception accurate, not accurate when picking up object
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

how are illusions used in visual systems studying

A
  • illusion fools perception but not grip aperture

- allows for distinguishing b/t memory based and real time control of actions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

how are patients w/optic ataxia still able to accurately perform grasping movements?

A

evidence for real-time vs. memory based control: patients w/optic ataxia (dorsal stream damage) who are still able to perform accurate grasping movements based on memory and internal predictive model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

hand eye coordination during movement

A
  • eye movement then initiation of reaching
  • proprioceptive and visual information used to calculate appropriate motor output and efference copy
  • error computed against efference copy to correct movement
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

double step paradigm

A

target moved, then jumps again during eye movement

-takes advantage of saccadic supression to dissociate perception and action

22
Q

saccadic supression

A

reduction in sensitivity to visual inflow during eye movements

  • affects only CONSCIOUS perception of target location
  • limb movements to correct error show correction (guided to dorsal visual stream)
23
Q

volitional vs. automatic control

A
  • volitional relies on perceptual visual info
  • automatic uses visuomotor info largely unavailable to conscious perception
  • reaching vs. anti reaching movements
24
Q

parietal lobe and online control of reaching movements

A

lesion and TMS leads to impairments in online corrections to mvmt jump

25
Q

visual masking

A

=hiding a prime from conscious perception by displaying it briefly then replacing with mask

  • mask overrides previously stored sensory stimuli
  • prime produces compatibility effect on RT
26
Q

address specific control

A

executive exerts control over each individual variable

27
Q

univocal control

A

assumes one-to-one correspondence over motor command to output
-same command=same output in different circumstances

28
Q

bernstein’s challenges

A

degrees of freedom
-too many variables to control (even more considering muscles and motor units)
-address specific control of MU’s would be 1000s of DOF
context conditioned variability
-role of muscle changes based on limb position, body position, etc-univocal control not possible

29
Q

solution to DOF problem

A

-functional constraints an motor units and muscle groups
evidence
-longer RT w/bimanual movements (would be the same if controlled independently)
-during bimanual assymetric task, movements to close objects resemble the long ones (slower and synchronized velocity than expected) b/c limbs are functionally constrained
-both flight paths of limbs affected by obstruction in one’s path

30
Q

coordinative structure

A

=functional linkage of mm that act of a single unit to minimize DOF for CNS during response programming
-synchronation can interfere w/tasks that require different actions for each limb

31
Q

self organization

A

system that shows organized behavior/patterns of behavior where nothing is dictating it

32
Q

dynamical dystems

A

=system w/mutually interacting components and some kind of spatial or temporal definition that changes over time
-tends toward equilibrium or attractor states

33
Q

attractor state

A

state the system will move toward b/c of inherent stability

-system returns to this after perturbation through negative feedback loop

34
Q

spring as example of attractor states

A

restoring force opposes the stretch/compression of the spring and moves it back to attractor state
-damping force opposes velocity and moves in opposite direction to displacement (essentially friction)

35
Q

von holsts rules of coordination

A
  1. only a few patterns easily performed and are distinguised by stability
  2. stable patterns are maintained until critical limiting condition is reached, then transition occurs
  3. tend toward increasing stability
36
Q

magnet effect and maintenance tendency

A 
magnet effect (entrainment dynamics)-one part of system tends toward other to synchronize
maintenance tendancy-each part of system has a preferred rhythm that the magnet effect pulls it out of
37
Q

importance of transitions

A
  • studied as functional adaptations based on their stability, metabolic cost, and interference
  • preferred (more stable) patterns will have lower metabolic cost
  • patterns are self-organizing: spinal cat can change pattern
  • lower metabolic cost of running/walking preferred
38
Q

phase transition paradigm and pattern transitions

A
  • in phase and out of phase are inherently stable and can be maintained at lower frequencies
  • as frequency increases, it becomes a limiting condition for antiphase and transition to more stable in phase happens
39
Q

egocentric principle

A

holds for tasks involving same limb (homologous muscles)

-stability of pattern in in phase depends on symmetric activation of homologous muscles

40
Q

allocentric principle

A

holds for tasks involving different limbs/people

-same direction of mvmt is more stable

41
Q

HKB Model

A

models intrinsic dynamics of motor coordination

  • maps stability of the state as a function of relative phase
  • mathematical model predicts attractor states
  • stability is analogous to potential energy, current state’s relative position is to attractor states
  • z=frequency of oscillation
42
Q

evidence from HKB model

A

-constant error and variation decrease as relative phase approaches an attractor state

43
Q

HKB model predictions and coordination

A
  • HKB model predicts behavior will move toward one attractor state
  • some are stronger
  • spontaneous transition in ONE direction (hysteresis)
  • as parameters of the system change, the strength of the atrractor determines ability to stay in that pattern
  • staying in weaker attractor will lead to coordination breaking down and moving toward stronger attractor
  • critical fluctuations=variability increases as you approach a transition b/c attractor is weaker
  • critical slowing down: how long it takes to get back to a pattern depends on stability of pattern (longer for antiphase)
44
Q

intention and dynamics landscape

A
  • intention is a specific influence on a pattern
  • intrinsic pattern can be further stabalized by intention
  • you can attract dynamics toward the pattern you want to perform
  • -*coordination dynamics reflect intention interacting w/underlying intrinsic pattern
45
Q

interaction b/t intention and intrinsic dynamics

A
  • if intention is supported by intrinsic dynamics, the pattern will be helped along
  • others will be harder to accomplish
  • intending to stay in antiphase as frequency increases–>breakdown of pattern back to inphase or phase wander
  • ie intention and ability to carry out intention is very influenced by underlying intrinsic dynamics
46
Q

learning and coordination dynamics

A

learning=developing new attractor state to learn new pattern of movement

  • requires modification of underlying landscape
  • error plot changes and new attractor state error starts high and reduces
47
Q

scanning coordination landscape

A

establishes a person’s intrinsic patterns

  • most people have seagull effect of in phase and antiphase attractor states
  • some people would have more
48
Q

contingent negative variation

A
  • slow wave during foreperiod
  • snesory motor association and expectancy (anticiptation)
  • early orienting wave, late expectancy motor prep related wave
  • amplitude decreases w/long foreperiod
49
Q

readiness potential

A

-slow shift in cortical potential preceding a self initiated voluntary movement
associated with volitional preparation of movement
-earlyRP, late RP, and motor potential

50
Q

LRP

A
  • detects when on side is more active
  • portion of RP on one specific side
  • onset=response selection and polarity indicates activation of correct/incorrect hand
51
Q

LRP fractioning

A
  • pre-motoric processes occur b/t stim onset and LRP onset (stim identification and response selection)
  • motoric processes occur b/t LRP onset and EMG onset-final motor preparation/end of response selection

KIN 330 (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions