Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42013152›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2026

Effects of sensorimotor delays and muscle force capacity limits on the performance of feedforward and feedback control in animals of different sizes.

Sayed Naseel Mohamed Thangal, Heather L More, C David Remy, J Maxwell Donelan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sayed Naseel Mohamed ThangalDepartment of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2690-2742
Heather L MoreDepartment of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
C David RemyInstitute for Adaptive Mechanical Systems, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
J Maxwell DonelanDepartment of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3880-893X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals rely on feedforward and feedback control for perturbation responses. When comparing terrestrial mammals of different sizes, we generally find that several features that affect perturbation responses change-larger animals have longer sensorimotor time delays, heavier body segments, and proportionally weaker muscles. We used simple computational models to study how control of fast perturbation responses is constrained by two limitations-sensorimotor delays and muscle force capacity-as a function of animal size. We developed two tasks representing common perturbation response scenarios in animal locomotion: a distributed mass pendulum approximating swing limb repositioning (swing task), and an inverted pendulum approximating whole body posture recovery (posture task). First, we used a normalized feedback control system to show how feedback response times can either be limited by the force generation capacity of muscles (force-limited), or by sensorimotor delays which constrain the maximum feedback gains that can be used to produce stable responses (delay-limited). Next, we used more detailed scaled models which represent the full size range of terrestrial mammals and parameterized the sensorimotor delays, maximum muscle forces, and inertial properties using scaling relationships from literature. Across animal size and in both tasks, we found that feedback control was primarily delay-limited-the fastest responses used a fraction of the available muscle force capacity. We compared feedback control to the fastest feedforward control strategy, and found that feedforward control response times were about four times faster than feedback control in the smallest animals, and around two times faster in the largest animals. For rapid perturbation responses, feedback control appears ineffective for terrestrial mammals of all sizes, as our simulated fastest response times exceeded available movement times. Thus, feedforward control strategies-including anticipatory adjustments, ballistic motor programs, and exploitation of intrinsic musculoskeletal dynamics-may be essential for reacting quickly to sudden and large perturbations in terrestrial mammals.

Indexed as

Body SizeFeedback, PhysiologicalFeedback, SensoryLocomotionModels, BiologicalMuscle, SkeletalAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaComputational BiologyComputer Simulation

Identifiers

PMID42013152
PMCPMC13152214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.