Plan- versus motion-referenced generalization of fast and slow processes in reach adaptation.

Generalization in motor learning refers to the transfer of a learned compensation to other relevant contexts. The generalization function is typically assumed to be of Gaussian shape, centered on the planned motion, although more recent studies associate generalization with the actual motion. Because motor learning is thought to involve multiple adaptive processes with different time constants, we hypothesized that these processes have different time-dependent contributions to the generalization. Guided by a model-based approach, the objective of the present study was to experimentally examine these contributions. We first reformulated a validated two-state adaptation model as a combination of weighted motor primitives, each specified as a Gaussian-shaped tuning function. Adaptation in this model is achieved by updating individual weights of the primitives of the fast and slow adaptive process separately. Depending on whether updating occurred in a plan-referenced or a motion-referenced manner, the model predicted distinct contributions to the overall generalization by the slow and fast process. We tested 23 participants in a reach adaptation task, using a spontaneous recovery paradigm consisting of five successive blocks of a long adaptation phase to a viscous force field, a short adaptation phase with the opposite force, and an error-clamp phase. Generalization was assessed in 11 movement directions relative to the trained target direction. Results of our participant population fell within a continuum of evidence for plan-referenced to evidence for motion-referenced updating. This mixture may reflect the differential weighting of explicit and implicit compensation strategies among participants.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Error-based reach adaptation can be modeled by fast and slow adaptive processes. Using a spontaneous recovery paradigm and model-based analyses, we tested how these processes generalize during force-field reach adaptation. Depending on whether the fast and slow adaptive processes operate by crediting the planned or actual motion, the model predicts distinct contributions of them to the overall generalization function. We show that human participants fall within a continuum of evidence for plan-referenced to motion-referenced updating.

Single versus dual-rate learning when exposed to Coriolis forces during reaching movements.

When we reach for an object during a passive whole body rotation, a tangential Coriolis force is generated on the arm. Yet, within a few trials, the brain adapts to this force so it does not disrupt the reach. Is this adaptation governed by a single-rate or dual-rate learning process? Here, guided by state-space modeling, we studied human reach adaptation in a fully-enclosed rotating room. After 90 pre-rotation reaches (baseline), participants were trained to make 240 to-and-fro reaches while the room rotated at 10 rpm (block A), then performed 6 reaches under opposite room rotation (block B), and subsequently made 100 post-rotation reaches (washout). A control group performed the same paradigm, but without the reaches during rotation block B. Single-rate and dual-rate models can be best dissociated if there would be full un-learning of compensation A during block B, but minimal learning of B. From the perspective of a dual-rate model, the un-learning observed in block B would mainly be caused by the faster state, such that the washout reaches would show retention effects of the slower state, called spontaneous recovery. Alternatively, following a single-rate model, the same state would govern the learning in block A and un-learning in block B, such that the washout reaches mimic the baseline reaches. Our results do not provide clear signs of spontaneous recovery in the washout reaches. Model fits further show that a single-rate process outperformed a dual-rate process. We suggest that a single-rate process underlies Coriolis force reach adaptation, perhaps because these forces relate to familiar body dynamics and are assigned to an internal cause.