Four studies describe the pointing performance of individuals with fine motor skills impairments. First, we describe the pointing performance of two individuals with Parkinsons disease via a sub-movement analysis and compare them with similar results found in the literature from young children and older able-bodied adults. The analysis suggests the need of an individual assessment of pointing difficulties and the personalization of the methods of assistance and motivates sub-sequent studies. Two experiments followed where we tested PointAssist, software that assists in pointing tasks by detecting difficulty through a sub-movement analysis and triggering help, with adjustments proposed to personalize the assistance provided. A within-subjects study with sixteen individuals with fine motor skills impairments resulted in statistically significant effects on accuracy using Friedman's test with (χχ/sup>(1) = 6.4, p = .011) in favor of personalized PointAssist. A five week longitudinal study with three participants with Cerebral Palsy and other fine motor skills impairments shows the long term effects of PointAssist. The longitudinal study logged real-world use of pointing devices validating the results for real-world interactions. PointAssist had statistically significant effect of reduced sub-movement length and speed with p < .00001 and p < .0002 respectively for one of the participants. These results suggest better motor control near a target and statistically significant results on the sub-movement duration confirmed this. Finally, we designed, developed and tested a new assistive technology for individuals with severe motor skills impairments that we call the Reverse Funnel. Three participants, two with Cerebral Palsy and one with an undisclosed disability, participated and positive early results are presented as well as future developments of the newly developed strategy.

Speed-accuracy tradeoffs, velocity profiles, and physiological tremor are fundamental characteristics of human movement. The principles underlying these phenomena have long attracted major interest and controversy. Each is well established experimentally but as yet they have no common theoretical basis. It is proposed that these three phenomena occur as the direct consequence of a movement response planning system that acts as an intermittent optimal controller operating at discrete intervals of ~100 ms. The BUMP model of response planning describes such a system. It forms the kernel of adaptive model theory which defines, in computational terms, a basic unit of motor production or BUMP. Each BUMP consists of three processes: (i) analysing sensory information, (ii) planning a desired optimal response, and (iii) executing that response. These processes operate in parallel across successive sequential BUMPs. The response planning process requires a discrete time interval in which to generate a minimum acceleration trajectory of variable duration, or horizon, to connect the actual response with the predicted future state of the target and compensate for executional error. BUMP model simulation studies show that intermittent adaptive optimal control employing two extremes of variable horizon predictive control reproduces almost exactly findings from several authoritative human experiments. On the one extreme, simulating spatially-constrained movements, a receding horizon strategy results in a logarithmic speed-accuracy tradeoff and accompanying asymmetrical velocity profiles. On the other extreme, simulating temporally-constrained movements, a fixed horizon strategy results in a linear speed-accuracy tradeoff and accompanying symmetrical velocity profiles. Furthermore, simulating ramp movements, a receding horizon strategy closely reproduces experimental observations of 10 Hz physiological tremor. A 100 ms planning interval yields waveforms and power spectra equivalent to those of joint-angle, angular velocity and electromyogram signals recorded for several speeds, directions, and skill levels of finger movement. While other models of response planning account for one or other set of experimentally observed features of speed-accuracy tradeoffs, velocity profiles, and physiological tremor, none accounts for all three. The BUMP model succeeds in explaining these disparate movement phenomena within a single framework, strengthening this approach as the foundation for a unified theory of motor control and planning.

Speed-accuracy tradeoffs, velocity profiles, and physiological tremor are fundamental characteristics of human movement. The principles underlying these phenomena have long attracted major interest and controversy. Each is well established experimentally but as yet they have no common theoretical basis. It is proposed that these three phenomena occur as the direct consequence of a movement response planning system that acts as an intermittent optimal controller operating at discrete intervals of ~100 ms. The BUMP model of response planning describes such a system. It forms the kernel of adaptive model theory which defines, in computational terms, a basic unit of motor production or BUMP. Each BUMP consists of three processes: (i) analysing sensory information, (ii) planning a desired optimal response, and (iii) executing that response. These processes operate in parallel across successive sequential BUMPs. The response planning process requires a discrete time interval in which to generate a minimum acceleration trajectory of variable duration, or horizon, to connect the actual response with the predicted future state of the target and compensate for executional error. BUMP model simulation studies show that intermittent adaptive optimal control employing two extremes of variable horizon predictive control reproduces almost exactly findings from several authoritative human experiments. On the one extreme, simulating spatially-constrained movements, a receding horizon strategy results in a logarithmic speed-accuracy tradeoff and accompanying asymmetrical velocity profiles. On the other extreme, simulating temporally-constrained movements, a fixed horizon strategy results in a linear speed-accuracy tradeoff and accompanying symmetrical velocity profiles. Furthermore, simulating ramp movements, a receding horizon strategy closely reproduces experimental observations of 10 Hz physiological tremor. A 100 ms planning interval yields waveforms and power spectra equivalent to those of joint-angle, angular velocity and electromyogram signals recorded for several speeds, directions, and skill levels of finger movement. While other models of response planning account for one or other set of experimentally observed features of speed-accuracy tradeoffs, velocity profiles, and physiological tremor, none accounts for all three. The BUMP model succeeds in explaining these disparate movement phenomena within a single framework, strengthening this approach as the foundation for a unified theory of motor control and planning.

No description available.