Hammering Does Not Fit Fitts' Law

Autor: Tadej Petrič; Cole S. Simpson; Aleš Ude; Auke J. Ijspeert
Sprache: Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2017
Quelle: Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
Online Zugang: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fncom.2017.00045/full
https://doaj.org/toc/1662-5188
1662-5188
doi:10.3389/fncom.2017.00045
https://doaj.org/article/821715db96d84228a63b63362a43c3bd
https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2017.00045
https://doaj.org/article/821715db96d84228a63b63362a43c3bd
Erfassungsnummer: ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:821715db96d84228a63b63362a43c3bd

Zusammenfassung

While movement is essential to human wellbeing, we are still unable to reproduce the deftness and robustness of human movement in automatons or completely restore function to individuals with many types of motor impairment. To better understand how the human nervous system plans and controls movements, neuromechanists employ simple tasks such as upper extremity reaches and isometric force tasks. However, these simple tasks rarely consider impacts and may not capture aspects of motor control that arise from real-world complexity. Here we compared existing models of motor control with the results of a periodic targeted impact task extended from Bernstein's seminal work: hammering a nail into wood. We recorded impact forces and kinematics from 10 subjects hammering at different frequencies and with hammers with different physical properties (mass and face area). We found few statistical differences in most measures between different types of hammer, demonstrating human robustness to minor changes in dynamics. Because human motor control is thought to obey optimality principles, we also developed a feedforward optimal simulation with a neuromechanically inspired cost function that reproduces the experimental data. However, Fitts' Law, which relates movement time to distance traveled and target size, did not match our experimental data. We therefore propose a new model in which the distance moved is a logarithmic function of the time to move that yields better results (R2 ≥ 0.99 compared to R2 ≥ 0.88). These results support the argument that humans control movement in an optimal way, but suggest that Fitts' Law may not generalize to periodic impact tasks.