Biomimetics of human movement: functional or aesthetic?

Abstract

How should robotic or prosthetic arms be programmed to move? Copying human smooth movements is popular in synthetic systems, but what does this really achieve? We cannot address these biomimetic issues without a deep understanding of why natural movements are so stereotyped. In this article, we distinguish between ‘functional’ and ‘aesthetic’ biomimetics. Functional biomimetics requires insight into the problem that nature has solved and recognition that a similar problem exists in the synthetic system. In aesthetic biomimetics, nature is copied for its own sake and no insight is needed. We examine the popular minimum jerk (MJ) model that has often been used to generate smooth human-like point-to-point movements in synthetic arms. The MJ model was originally justified as maximizing ‘smoothness’; however, it is also the limiting optimal trajectory for a wide range of cost functions for brief movements, including the minimum variance (MV) model, where smoothness is a by-product of optimizing the speed–accuracy trade-off imposed by proportional noise (PN: signal-dependent noise with the standard deviation proportional to mean). PN is unlikely to be dominant in synthetic systems, and the control objectives of natural movements (speed and accuracy) would not be optimized in synthetic systems by human-like movements. Thus, employing MJ or MV controllers in robotic arms is just aesthetic biomimetics. For prosthetic arms, the goal is aesthetic by definition, but it is still crucial to recognize that MV trajectories and PN are deeply embedded in the human motor system. Thus, PN arises at the neural level, as a recruitment strategy of motor units and probably optimizes motor neuron noise. Human reaching is under continuous adaptive control. For prosthetic devices that do not have this natural architecture, natural plasticity would drive the system towards unnatural movements. We propose that a truly neuromorphic system with parallel force generators (muscle fibres) and noisy drivers (motor neurons) would permit plasticity to adapt the control of a prosthetic limb towards human-like movement.