» Articles » PMID: 12386742

Multisensory Fusion and the Stochastic Structure of Postural Sway

Overview
Journal Biol Cybern
Specialties Neurology
Physiology
Date 2002 Oct 19
PMID 12386742
Citations 67
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We analyze the stochastic structure of postural sway and demonstrate that this structure imposes important constraints on models of postural control. Linear stochastic models of various orders were fit to the center-of-mass trajectories of subjects during quiet stance in four sensory conditions: (i) light touch and vision, (ii) light touch, (iii) vision, and (iv) neither touch nor vision. For each subject and condition, the model of appropriate order was determined, and this model was characterized by the eigenvalues and coefficients of its autocovariance function. In most cases, postural-sway trajectories were similar to those produced by a third-order model with eigenvalues corresponding to a slow first-order decay plus a faster-decaying damped oscillation. The slow-decay fraction, which we define as the slow-decay autocovariance coefficient divided by the total variance, was usually near 1. We compare the stochastic structure of our data to two linear control-theory models: (i) a proportional-integral-derivative control model in which the postural system's state is assumed to be known, and (ii) an optimal-control model in which the system's state is estimated based on noisy multisensory information using a Kalman filter. Under certain assumptions, both models have eigenvalues consistent with our results. However, the slow-decay fraction predicted by both models is less than we observe. We show that our results are more consistent with a modification of the optimal-control model in which noise is added to the computations performed by the state estimator. This modified model has a slow-decay fraction near 1 in a parameter regime in which sensory information related to the body's velocity is more accurate than sensory information related to position and acceleration. These findings suggest that: (i) computation noise is responsible for much of the variance observed in postural sway, and (ii) the postural control system under the conditions tested resides in the regime of accurate velocity information.

Citing Articles

Cortical tracking of postural sways during standing balance.

Legrand T, Mongold S, Muller L, Naeije G, Vander Ghinst M, Bourguignon M Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):30110.

PMID: 39627308 PMC: 11615285. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-81865-2.


Visual motion detection thresholds can be reliably measured during walking and standing.

DiBianca S, Jeka J, Reimann H Front Hum Neurosci. 2023; 17:1239071.

PMID: 38021240 PMC: 10665501. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1239071.


Optimal controllers resembling postural sway during upright stance.

Jafari H, Gustafsson T PLoS One. 2023; 18(5):e0285098.

PMID: 37130115 PMC: 10153747. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285098.


Unperceived motor actions of the balance system interfere with the causal attribution of self-motion.

Tisserand R, Rasman B, Omerovic N, Peters R, Forbes P, Blouin J PNAS Nexus. 2023; 1(4):pgac174.

PMID: 36714829 PMC: 9802180. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac174.


Integrating ankle and hip strategies for the stabilization of upright standing: An intermittent control model.

Morasso P Front Comput Neurosci. 2022; 16:956932.

PMID: 36465968 PMC: 9713939. DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2022.956932.