Abstract
We review the uncontrolled manifold (UCM) approach to the analysis of motor variance. In that approach, variance in multi-degree of freedom systems is decomposed into variance that leaves task variables invariant (UCM) and variance that does not (orthogonal to UCM). Larger variance within the UCM than orthogonal to it is interpreted as evidence for a task-specific solution of the multi-degree of freedom problem. The extent to which UCM measures depend on the choice of variables and coordinate systems has been a topic of controversial discussion. We clarify these issues and explain the sense in which the UCM approach is geometric in nature. We embrace a combined approach in which the geometrical perspective is retained but complemented by an assessment of the correlations in multi-degree of freedom movement data. We then review the problem of motor equivalence, in which deterministic rather than stochastic perturbations probe the organization of multiple degrees of freedom. We argue that motor equivalence requires a UCM perspective because the effect of perturbations on the task variable cannot be compared to their effect on task-irrelevant dimension of the system unless both are embedded in a shared space. The geometrical interpretation of UCM is thus critical for this extension of the UCM approach. We finally briefly review the concept of self-motion that is likewise based on the geometrical view of UCM.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Bernstein N. 1967. The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Bullock D, Grossberg S, Guenther F. 1993. A self-organizing neural model of motor equivalence reaching and tool use by a multijoint arm. J Cogn Neurosci 5:408–435.
Butz MV, Herbort O, Hoffmann J. 2007. Exploiting redundancy for flexible behavior: unsupervised learning in a modular sensorimotor control architecture. Psychol Rev 114(4):1015–1046.
Cusumano JP, Cesari P. 2006. Body-goal variability mapping in an aiming task. Biol Cybern 94:367–379.
Freitas SMSF, Scholz JP. 2010. A comparison of methods for identifying the Jacobian for uncontrolled manifold analysis. J Biomech 43:775–777.
Grigg P. 1994. Peripheral neural mechanisms in proprioception. J Sport Rehabil 3:2–17.
Kelso JA, Tuller B, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Fowler CA. 1984. Functionally specific articulatory cooperation following jaw perturbations during speech: evidence for coordinative structures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 10(6):812–832.
Krishnamoorthy V, Latash ML, Scholz JP, Zatsiorsky VM. 2003. Muscle synergies during shifts of the center of pressure by standing persons. Exp Brain Res 152(3):281.
Krishnamoorthy V, Scholz JP, Latash ML. 2007. The use of flexible arm muscle synergies to perform an isometric stabilization task. Clin Neurophysiol 118(3):525–537.
Latash ML. 2012. The bliss of motor abundance. Exp Brain Res 217(1):1–5.
Latash ML, Scholz JF, Danion F, Schoner G. (2001). Structure of motor variability in marginally redundant multifinger force production tasks. Exp Brain Res 141:153–165.
Latash ML, Scholz JF, Danion F, Schoner G. (2002a). Finger coordination during discrete and oscillatory force production tasks. Exp Brain Res 146(4):419–432.
Latash ML, Scholz JF, Schoner G. (2002b). Motor control strategies revealed in the structure of motor variability. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 30(1):26–31.
Latash ML, Scholz JF, Schoner G. 2007. Toward a new theory of motor synergies. Motor Control 11(3):276–308.
Martin V, Scholz JP, Schöner G. 2009. Redundancy, self-motion, and motor control. Neural Comp 21(5):1371–1414.
Müller H, Sternad D. 2004. Decomposition of variability in the execution of goal-oriented tasks: Three components of skill improvement. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30:212–233.
Park J, Wu Y-H, Lewis MM, Huang X, Latash ML. 2012. Changes in multi-finger interaction and coordination in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurophysiol 108:915–924.
Park J, Lewis MM, Huang X, Latash ML. 2013. Effects of olivo-ponto-cerebellar atrophy (OPCA) on finger interaction and coordination. Clin Neurophysiol 124:991–998.
Poppele RE, Bosco G, Rankin AM. 2001. Independent representations of limb axis length and orientation in spinocerelbellar response components. J Neurophysiol 87:409–422.
Reimann H, Schöner G, Scholz JP. (2011). Visual information is sufficient for maintaining upright stance – a multi-joint model of human posture. Program No. 184.05 2011 Neuroscience Meeting Planner. Washington: Society for Neuroscience. Online
Reisman D, Scholz JP. 2006. Workspace location influences joint coordination during reaching in post-stroke hemiparesis. Exp Brain Res 170:265–276.
Scholz JP, Schoner G. 1999. The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task. Exp Brain Res 126(3):289–306.
Scholz JP, Schöner G, Latash ML. 2000. Identifying the control structure of multijoint coordination during pistol shooting. Exp Brain Res 135:382–404.
Scholz JP, Reisman D, Schöner G. 2001. Effects of varying task constraints on solutions to joint coordination in a sit-to-stand task. Exp Brain Res 141(4):485.
Scholz JP, Danion F, Latash ML, Schoner G. 2002. Understanding finger coordination through analysis of the structure of force variability. Biol Cybern, 86(1):29–39.
Scholz JP, Schöner G, Hsu WL, Jeka JJ, Horak FB, Martin V. 2007. Motor equivalent control of the center of mass in response to support surface perturbations. Exp Brain Res 180:163–179.
Scholz JP, Dwight-Higgin T, Lynch JE, Tseng Y, Martin V, Schöner G. 2011. Motor equivalence and self-motion induced by different movement speeds. Exp Brain Res 209:319–332.
Schöner G. 1995. Recent developments and problems in human movement science and their conceptual implications. Ecol Psych 7(4):291–314.
Schöner G, Scholz JP. 2007. Analyzing variance in multi-degree-of-freedom movements: uncovering structure versus extracting correlations. Motor Control 11:259–275.
Sternad D, Park S-W, Müller H, Hogan N. 2010. Coordinate dependence of variability analysis. PLoS Comp Biol 6(4 (e1000751)), 1–16.
Todorov E, Jordan MI. 2003. A minimal intervention principle for coordinated movement. In T. Becker, Obermayer (Ed.), Advances in Neural Information Processing (Vol. 15, pp. 27–34). Boston: MIT Press.
Verrel J, Lövdén M, Lindenberger U. 2010. Motor-equivalent covariation stabilizes step parameters and center of mass position during treadmill walking. Exp Brain Res 207(1–2):13–26.
Yen JT, Chang Y-H. 2009. Rate-dependent control strategies stabilize limb forces during human locomotion. J R Soc Interface 7(46):801–810.
Acknowledgments
Work reviewed here was supported by NINDS Grant R01-NS050880 to John Scholz and DFG (Germany) Grant SCHO 336/7-1 to Gregor Schöner. Thanks to Dr. Hendrik Reimann for a critical reading. A draft of this paper was completed by John Scholz shortly before he passed away.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this paper
Cite this paper
Scholz, J., Schöner, G. (2014). Use of the Uncontrolled Manifold (UCM) Approach to Understand Motor Variability, Motor Equivalence, and Self-motion. In: Levin, M. (eds) Progress in Motor Control. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 826. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1338-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1338-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1337-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1338-1
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)