Trial reportThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2015
Flexible Control of Safety Margins for Action Based on Environmental Variability.
Trial report in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trajectory elevation in reach-to-grasp movements under increased arm weight and repeated trials.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- How background music rhythm modulates time perception: Evidence from the estimation of collision time.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Article
- Dynamical stability and mechanical impedance are optimized when manipulating uncertain dynamically complex objects.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Grip and manipulation forces are controlled independently in a coupled bimanual task.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- A Singular Theory of Sensorimotor Coordination: On Targeted Motions in Space.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Grip force control under sudden change of friction.The Journal of physiology · 2025Article
- Handy divisions: Hand-specific specialization of prehensile control in bimanual tasks.PloS one · 2025Article
- Increased muscle coactivation is linked with fast feedback control when reaching in unpredictable visual environments.iScience · 2024Article
- Co-contraction embodies uncertainty: An optimal feedforward strategy for robust motor control.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- The cerebellum acts as the analog to the medial temporal lobe for sensorimotor memory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Distribution of control during bimanual movement and stabilization.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Distinct sensorimotor mechanisms underlie the control of grasp and manipulation forces for dexterous manipulation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The nervous system tunes sensorimotor gains when reaching in variable mechanical environments.iScience · 2023Article
- Learning acquisition of consistent leader-follower relationships depends on implicit haptic interactions.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Distinct adaptation processes underlie multidigit force coordination for dexterous manipulation.Journal of neurophysiology · 2023Article
- Expectation of volitional arm movement has prolonged effects on the grip force exerted on a pinched object.Experimental brain research · 2022Article
- Efficient tactile encoding of object slippage.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Motor planning under uncertainty.eLife · 2021Article
- Did We Get Sensorimotor Adaptation Wrong? Implicit Adaptation as Direct Policy Updating Rather than Forward-Model-Based Learning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To reduce the risk of slip, grip force (GF) control includes a safety margin above the force level ordinarily sufficient for the expected load force (LF) dynamics. The current view is that this safety margin is based on the expected LF dynamics, amounting to a static safety factor like that often used in engineering design. More efficient control could be achieved, however, if the motor system reduces the safety margin when LF variability is low and increases it when this variability is high. Here we show that this is indeed the case by demonstrating that the human motor system sizes the GF safety margin in proportion to an internal estimate of LF variability to maintain a fixed statistical confidence against slip. In contrast to current models of GF control that neglect the variability of LF dynamics, we demonstrate that GF is threefold more sensitive to the SD than the expected value of LF dynamics, in line with the maintenance of a 3-sigma confidence level. We then show that a computational model of GF control that includes a variability-driven safety margin predicts highly asymmetric GF adaptation between increases versus decreases in load. We find clear experimental evidence for this asymmetry and show that it explains previously reported differences in how rapidly GFs and manipulatory forces adapt. This model further predicts bizarre nonmonotonic shapes for GF learning curves, which are faithfully borne out in our experimental data. Our findings establish a new role for environmental variability in the control of action.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.