Abstract

Despite recent advances in robot-assisted training, the benefits of haptic guidance on motor (re)learning are still limited. While haptic guidance may increase task performance during training, it may also decrease participants' effort and interfere with the perception of the environment dynamics, hindering somatosensory information crucial for motor learning. Importantly, haptic guidance limits motor variability, a factor considered essential for learning. We propose that Model Predictive Controllers (MPC) might be good alternatives to haptic guidance since they minimize the assisting forces and promote motor variability during training. We conducted a study with 40 healthy participants to investigate the effectiveness of MPCs on learning a dynamic task. The task consisted of swinging a virtual pendulum to hit incoming targets with the pendulum ball. The environment was haptically rendered using a Delta robot. We designed two MPCs: the first MPC—end-effector MPC—applied the optimal assisting forces on the end-effector. A second MPC—ball MPC—applied its forces on the virtual pendulum ball to further reduce the assisting forces. The participants' performance during training and learning at short- and long-term retention tests were compared to a control group who trained without assistance, and a group that trained with conventional haptic guidance. We hypothesized that the end-effector MPC would promote motor variability and minimize the assisting forces during training, and thus, promote learning. Moreover, we hypothesized that the ball MPC would enhance the performance and motivation during training but limit the motor variability and sense of agency (i.e., the feeling of having control over their movements), and therefore, limit learning. We found that the MPCs reduce the assisting forces compared to haptic guidance. Training with the end-effector MPC increases the movement variability and does not hinder the pendulum swing variability during training, ultimately enhancing the learning of the task dynamics compared to the other groups. Finally, we observed that increases in the sense of agency seemed to be associated with learning when training with the end-effector MPC. In conclusion, training with MPCs enhances motor learning of tasks with complex dynamics and are promising strategies to improve robotic training outcomes in neurological patients.

Highlights

  • Robotic devices provide new possibilities for understanding and accelerating motorlearning (Lum et al, 2012; Williams and Carnahan, 2014)

  • We hypothesize that the problem associated with haptic guidance might be twofold: first, participants might rely on the robotic assistance, which in turn limits the perception of the dynamics of the training environment (Powell and O’Malley, 2012; Pezent et al, 2019), and secondly, by enforcing a predefined trajectory, haptic guidance limits motor variability, crucial in motor learning (Wu et al, 2014)

  • The interaction forces increased significantly more in the eeMPC group compared to the Control and Ball MPC (ballMPC) groups

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Robotic devices provide new possibilities for understanding and accelerating motor (re)learning (Lum et al, 2012; Williams and Carnahan, 2014). Interacting with complex dynamical systems relies on somatosensory (i.e., proprioceptive and tactile) information (Milner et al, 2007) to convey essential information for fine motor control, such as carrying a virtual cup of coffee (Hasson et al, 2012), tasks that require identifying the natural oscillation frequency of an object (Huang et al, 2007), or learning to manipulate non-rigid objects (Danion et al, 2012). Enhancement of somatosensory information through haptic rendering of virtual environments during robotic training might elicit better motor (re)learning of complex dynamic tasks (Gassert and Dietz, 2018). It would be beneficial to develop new robotic strategies that minimize the assisting forces to prevent slacking and reduce the interference with the haptic rendering, while still allowing participants to achieve high task performance to promote motivation (Saemi et al, 2012; Widmer et al, 2016)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call