ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2018
Estimating properties of the fast and slow adaptive processes during sensorimotor adaptation.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- To learn or not to learn? Model-based estimation of motor learning in a large, "in the wild", home rehabilitation database.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Hypothesis testing governs strategic motor learning.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Automatic, But Not Autonomous: Implicit Adaptation Is Modulated by Goal-Directed Attentional Demands.eNeuro · 2026Article
- Linking systemic metabolic state to long-term motor memory: Insights from respiratory exchange ratio and glucose manipulation.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Modeling human visuomotor adaptation with a disturbance observer framework.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Savings in visuomotor learning are associated with connectivity changes within a cerebello-thalamo-cortical network encoding movement errors.Brain structure & function · 2025Article
- Protection of savings by reducing the salience of opposing errors.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Adaptation across the 2D population code explains the spatially distributive nature of motor learning.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Comparison of sequential data analysis and functional data analysis for locomotor adaptation.PloS one · 2025Article
- Applied Motor Noise Affects Specific Learning Mechanisms during Short-Term Adaptation to Novel Movement Dynamics.eNeuro · 2025Article
- Article
- Early-Stage Alzheimer's Disease Affects Fast But Not Slow Adaptive Processes in Motor Learning.eNeuro · 2024Article
- A software tool for at-home measurement of sensorimotor adaptation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- A triple distinction of cerebellar function for oculomotor learning and fatigue compensation.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Statistical determinants of visuomotor adaptation along different dimensions during naturalistic 3D reaches.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Random Practice Enhances Retention and Spatial Transfer in Force Field Adaptation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- The cost of correcting for error during sensorimotor adaptation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- An implicit memory of errors limits human sensorimotor adaptation.Nature human behaviour · 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
Experience of a prediction error recruits multiple motor learning processes, some that learn strongly from error but have weak retention and some that learn weakly from error but exhibit strong retention. These processes are not generally observable but are inferred from their collective influence on behavior. Is there a robust way to uncover the hidden processes? A standard approach is to consider a state space model where the hidden states change following experience of error and then fit the model to the measured data by minimizing the squared error between measurement and model prediction. We found that this least-squares algorithm (LMSE) often yielded unrealistic predictions about the hidden states, possibly because of its neglect of the stochastic nature of error-based learning. We found that behavioral data during adaptation was better explained by a system in which both error-based learning and movement production were stochastic processes. To uncover the hidden states of learning, we developed a generalized expectation maximization (EM) algorithm. In simulation, we found that although LMSE tracked the measured data marginally better than EM, EM was far more accurate in unmasking the time courses and properties of the hidden states of learning. In a power analysis designed to measure the effect of an intervention on sensorimotor learning, EM significantly reduced the number of subjects that were required for effective hypothesis testing. In summary, we developed a new approach for analysis of data in sensorimotor experiments. The new algorithm improved the ability to uncover the multiple processes that contribute to learning from error. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Motor learning is supported by multiple adaptive processes, each with distinct error sensitivity and forgetting rates. We developed a generalized expectation maximization algorithm that uncovers these hidden processes in the context of modern sensorimotor learning experiments that include error-clamp trials and set breaks. The resulting toolbox may improve the ability to identify the properties of these hidden processes and reduce the number of subjects needed to test the effectiveness of interventions on sensorimotor learning.
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.