Multisensory control of human upright stance

C. Maurer, T. Mergner, Robert (Bob) Peterka

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

210 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The interaction of different orientation senses contributing to posture control is not well understood. We therefore performed experiments in which we measured the postural responses of normal subjects and vestibular loss patients during perturbation of their stance. Subjects stood on a motion platform with their eyes closed and auditory cues masked. The perturbing stimuli consisted of either platform tilts or external torque produced by force-controlled pull of the subjects' body on a stationary platform. Furthermore, we presented trials in which these two stimuli were applied when the platform was body-sway referenced (i.e., coupled 1:1 to body position, by which ankle joint proprioceptive feedback is essentially removed). We analyzed subjects' postural responses, i.e., the excursions of their center of mass (COM) and center of pressure (COP), using a systems analysis approach. We found gain and phase of the responses to vary as a function of stimulus frequency and in relation to the absence versus presence of vestibular and proprioceptive cues. In addition, gain depended on stimulus amplitude, reflecting a non-linearity in the control. The experimental results were compared to simulation results obtained from an 'inverted pendulum' model of posture control. In the model, sensor fusion mechanisms yield internal estimates of the external stimuli, i.e., of the external torque (pull), the platform tilt and gravity. These estimates are derived from three sensor systems: ankle proprioceptors, vestibular sensors and plantar pressure sensors (somatosensory graviceptors). They are fed as global set point signals into a local control loop of the ankle joints, which is based on proprioceptive negative feedback. This local loop stabilizes the body-on-foot support, while the set point signals upgrade the loop into a body-in-space control. Amplitude non-linearity was implemented in the model in the form of central threshold mechanisms. In model simulations that combined sensor fusion and thresholds, an automatic context-specific sensory re-weighting across stimulus conditions occurred. Model parameters were identified using an optimization procedure. Results suggested that in the sway-referenced condition normal subjects altered their postural strategy by strongly weighting feedback from plantar somatosensory force sensors. Taking this strategy change into account, the model's simulation results well paralleled all experimental results across all conditions tested.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)231-250
Number of pages20
JournalExperimental Brain Research
Volume171
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2006

Fingerprint

Sensory Feedback
Ankle Joint
Torque
Posture
Cues
Pressure
Gravitation
Systems Analysis
Ankle
Foot

Keywords

  • Dynamic model
  • Multisensory integration
  • Postural control
  • Sensor fusion
  • Set point principle
  • Vestibular system

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

Multisensory control of human upright stance. / Maurer, C.; Mergner, T.; Peterka, Robert (Bob).

In: Experimental Brain Research, Vol. 171, No. 2, 05.2006, p. 231-250.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Maurer, C. ; Mergner, T. ; Peterka, Robert (Bob). / Multisensory control of human upright stance. In: Experimental Brain Research. 2006 ; Vol. 171, No. 2. pp. 231-250.
@article{e45c7317f0ac4013ab458eca0b272c13,
title = "Multisensory control of human upright stance",
abstract = "The interaction of different orientation senses contributing to posture control is not well understood. We therefore performed experiments in which we measured the postural responses of normal subjects and vestibular loss patients during perturbation of their stance. Subjects stood on a motion platform with their eyes closed and auditory cues masked. The perturbing stimuli consisted of either platform tilts or external torque produced by force-controlled pull of the subjects' body on a stationary platform. Furthermore, we presented trials in which these two stimuli were applied when the platform was body-sway referenced (i.e., coupled 1:1 to body position, by which ankle joint proprioceptive feedback is essentially removed). We analyzed subjects' postural responses, i.e., the excursions of their center of mass (COM) and center of pressure (COP), using a systems analysis approach. We found gain and phase of the responses to vary as a function of stimulus frequency and in relation to the absence versus presence of vestibular and proprioceptive cues. In addition, gain depended on stimulus amplitude, reflecting a non-linearity in the control. The experimental results were compared to simulation results obtained from an 'inverted pendulum' model of posture control. In the model, sensor fusion mechanisms yield internal estimates of the external stimuli, i.e., of the external torque (pull), the platform tilt and gravity. These estimates are derived from three sensor systems: ankle proprioceptors, vestibular sensors and plantar pressure sensors (somatosensory graviceptors). They are fed as global set point signals into a local control loop of the ankle joints, which is based on proprioceptive negative feedback. This local loop stabilizes the body-on-foot support, while the set point signals upgrade the loop into a body-in-space control. Amplitude non-linearity was implemented in the model in the form of central threshold mechanisms. In model simulations that combined sensor fusion and thresholds, an automatic context-specific sensory re-weighting across stimulus conditions occurred. Model parameters were identified using an optimization procedure. Results suggested that in the sway-referenced condition normal subjects altered their postural strategy by strongly weighting feedback from plantar somatosensory force sensors. Taking this strategy change into account, the model's simulation results well paralleled all experimental results across all conditions tested.",
keywords = "Dynamic model, Multisensory integration, Postural control, Sensor fusion, Set point principle, Vestibular system",
author = "C. Maurer and T. Mergner and Peterka, {Robert (Bob)}",
year = "2006",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s00221-005-0256-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "171",
pages = "231--250",
journal = "Experimental Brain Research",
issn = "0014-4819",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multisensory control of human upright stance

AU - Maurer, C.

AU - Mergner, T.

AU - Peterka, Robert (Bob)

PY - 2006/5

Y1 - 2006/5

N2 - The interaction of different orientation senses contributing to posture control is not well understood. We therefore performed experiments in which we measured the postural responses of normal subjects and vestibular loss patients during perturbation of their stance. Subjects stood on a motion platform with their eyes closed and auditory cues masked. The perturbing stimuli consisted of either platform tilts or external torque produced by force-controlled pull of the subjects' body on a stationary platform. Furthermore, we presented trials in which these two stimuli were applied when the platform was body-sway referenced (i.e., coupled 1:1 to body position, by which ankle joint proprioceptive feedback is essentially removed). We analyzed subjects' postural responses, i.e., the excursions of their center of mass (COM) and center of pressure (COP), using a systems analysis approach. We found gain and phase of the responses to vary as a function of stimulus frequency and in relation to the absence versus presence of vestibular and proprioceptive cues. In addition, gain depended on stimulus amplitude, reflecting a non-linearity in the control. The experimental results were compared to simulation results obtained from an 'inverted pendulum' model of posture control. In the model, sensor fusion mechanisms yield internal estimates of the external stimuli, i.e., of the external torque (pull), the platform tilt and gravity. These estimates are derived from three sensor systems: ankle proprioceptors, vestibular sensors and plantar pressure sensors (somatosensory graviceptors). They are fed as global set point signals into a local control loop of the ankle joints, which is based on proprioceptive negative feedback. This local loop stabilizes the body-on-foot support, while the set point signals upgrade the loop into a body-in-space control. Amplitude non-linearity was implemented in the model in the form of central threshold mechanisms. In model simulations that combined sensor fusion and thresholds, an automatic context-specific sensory re-weighting across stimulus conditions occurred. Model parameters were identified using an optimization procedure. Results suggested that in the sway-referenced condition normal subjects altered their postural strategy by strongly weighting feedback from plantar somatosensory force sensors. Taking this strategy change into account, the model's simulation results well paralleled all experimental results across all conditions tested.

AB - The interaction of different orientation senses contributing to posture control is not well understood. We therefore performed experiments in which we measured the postural responses of normal subjects and vestibular loss patients during perturbation of their stance. Subjects stood on a motion platform with their eyes closed and auditory cues masked. The perturbing stimuli consisted of either platform tilts or external torque produced by force-controlled pull of the subjects' body on a stationary platform. Furthermore, we presented trials in which these two stimuli were applied when the platform was body-sway referenced (i.e., coupled 1:1 to body position, by which ankle joint proprioceptive feedback is essentially removed). We analyzed subjects' postural responses, i.e., the excursions of their center of mass (COM) and center of pressure (COP), using a systems analysis approach. We found gain and phase of the responses to vary as a function of stimulus frequency and in relation to the absence versus presence of vestibular and proprioceptive cues. In addition, gain depended on stimulus amplitude, reflecting a non-linearity in the control. The experimental results were compared to simulation results obtained from an 'inverted pendulum' model of posture control. In the model, sensor fusion mechanisms yield internal estimates of the external stimuli, i.e., of the external torque (pull), the platform tilt and gravity. These estimates are derived from three sensor systems: ankle proprioceptors, vestibular sensors and plantar pressure sensors (somatosensory graviceptors). They are fed as global set point signals into a local control loop of the ankle joints, which is based on proprioceptive negative feedback. This local loop stabilizes the body-on-foot support, while the set point signals upgrade the loop into a body-in-space control. Amplitude non-linearity was implemented in the model in the form of central threshold mechanisms. In model simulations that combined sensor fusion and thresholds, an automatic context-specific sensory re-weighting across stimulus conditions occurred. Model parameters were identified using an optimization procedure. Results suggested that in the sway-referenced condition normal subjects altered their postural strategy by strongly weighting feedback from plantar somatosensory force sensors. Taking this strategy change into account, the model's simulation results well paralleled all experimental results across all conditions tested.

KW - Dynamic model

KW - Multisensory integration

KW - Postural control

KW - Sensor fusion

KW - Set point principle

KW - Vestibular system

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33646500089&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33646500089&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00221-005-0256-y

DO - 10.1007/s00221-005-0256-y

M3 - Article

VL - 171

SP - 231

EP - 250

JO - Experimental Brain Research

JF - Experimental Brain Research

SN - 0014-4819

IS - 2

ER -