Abstract: Few computational models have addressed the spatiotemporal features of unconstrained three-dimensional (3D) arm motion. Empirical observations made on hand paths, speed profiles, and arm postures during point-to-point movements led to the assumption that hand path and arm posture are independent of movement speed, suggesting that the geometric and temporal properties of movements are decoupled. In this study, we present a computational model of 3D movements for an arm with four degrees of freedom based on the assumption that optimization principles are separately applied at the geometric and temporal levels of control. Geometric properties (path and posture) are defined in terms of geodesic paths with respect to the kinetic energy metric in the Riemannian configuration space. Accordingly, a geodesic path can be generated with less muscular effort than on any other, nongeodesic path, because the sum of all configuration-speed-dependent torques vanishes. The temporal properties of the movement (speed) are determined in task space by minimizing the squared jerk along the selected end-effector path. The integration of both planning levels into a single spatiotemporal representation simplifies the control of arm dynamics along geodesic paths and results in movements with near minimal torque change and minimal peak value of kinetic energy. Thus, the application of Riemannian geometry allows for a reconciliation of computational models previously proposed for the description of arm movements. We suggest that geodesics are an emergent property of the motor system through the exploration of dynamical space. Our data validated the predictions for joint trajectories, hand paths, final postures, speed profiles, and driving torques.

Abstract: In motor learning tasks, there is mixed evidence for whether increased task-relevant variability in early learning stages leads to improved outcomes. One problem is that there may be a connection between skill level and motor variability, such that participants who initially have more variability may also perform worse on the task, so will have more room to improve. To avoid this confound, we experimentally manipulated the amount of movement timing variability (MTV) during training to test whether it improves performance. Based on previous studies showing that most of the improvement in finger-opposition tasks comes from optimizing the relative onset time of the finger movements, we used auditory cues (beeps) to guide the onset times of sequential movements during a training session, and then assessed motor performance after the intervention. Participants were assigned to three groups that either: (a) followed a prescribed random rhythm for their finger touches (Variable MTV), (b) followed a fixed rhythm (Fixed control MTV), or (c) produced the entire sequence following a single beep (Unsupervised control MTV). While the intervention was successful in increasing MTV during training for the Variable group, it did not lead to improved outcomes post-training compared to either control group, and the use of fixed timing led to significantly worse performance compared to the Unsupervised control group. These results suggest that manipulating MTV through auditory cues does not produce greater learning than unconstrained training in motor sequence tasks.