Cited by 1,187Motor Control and AdaptationNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurological disorders and treatments

A computational neuroanatomy for motor control

Open access
Shadmehr, Reza, Krakauer, John W.·2008·Experimental Brain Research

Abstract

The study of patients to infer normal brain function has a long tradition in neurology and psychology. More recently, the motor system has been subject to quantitative and computational characterization. The purpose of this review is to argue that the lesion approach and theoretical motor control can mutually inform each other. Specifically, one may identify distinct motor control processes from computational models and map them onto specific deficits in patients. Here we review some of the impairments in motor control, motor learning and higher-order motor control in patients with lesions of the corticospinal tract, the cerebellum, parietal cortex, the basal ganglia, and the medial temporal lobe. We attempt to explain some of these impairments in terms of computational ideas such as state estimation, optimization, prediction, cost, and reward. We suggest that a function of the cerebellum is system identification: to build internal models that predict sensory outcome of motor commands and correct motor commands through internal feedback. A function of the parietal cortex is state estimation: to integrate the predicted proprioceptive and visual outcomes with sensory feedback to form a belief about how the commands affected the states of the body and the environment. A function of basal ganglia is related to optimal control: learning costs and rewards associated with sensory states and estimating the "cost-to-go" during execution of a motor task. Finally, functions of the prima…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-008-1280-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the late training stage, which may correspond to the skill learning stage, the coordinated movement of forelimb and other body parts may be acquired by long-range signal transmission including sensory inputs from the periphery and cerebellum to the cerebral cortex through the thalamus.

    “In the late training stage, which may correspond to the skill learning stage, the coordinated movement of forelimb and other body parts may be acquired by long‐range signal transmission including sensory inputs from the periphery and cerebellum to the cerebral cortex through the thalamus (Bosch‐Bouju et al., 2013 ; Shadmehr & Krakauer, 2008 ).”

    From Motor learning requires myelination to reduce asynchrony and spontaneity in neural activity (2020) · cites this paper as Shadmehr & Krakauer, 2008

  • In conventional motor control theory, there are two models, an inverse model and a forward model.

    “In conventional motor control theory (Wolpert and Miall 1996;Todorov and Jordan 2002;Shadmehr and Krakauer 2008), there are two models, an inverse model and a forward model.”

    From Action and behavior: a free-energy formulation (2010) · cites this paper as Shadmehr and Krakauer 2008

  • If these ideas are valid, they speak to a fundamental role for perception in action.

    “If these ideas are valid, then they speak to a fundamental role for perception in action (Wolpert et al. 1995;Shadmehr and Krakauer 2008;Bays and Wolpert 2007;Tseng et al. 2007;Wei and Körding 2009).”

    From Action and behavior: a free-energy formulation (2010) · cites this paper as Shadmehr and Krakauer 2008

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 99 · Cited by 1,187

Authors
Shadmehr, R., & Krakauer, J. W.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Shadmehr, Reza
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Published
2008-02-05
Volume
185
Issue
3
Pages
359-381
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
OpenAlex
W2107325954
Cited by
1,187
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 70 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 84 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 61 · 2012: 54
FWCI
4.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (K02-048099, R01 052804, R01-037422)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007057)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS057814, R01NS037422)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
motor control, computational neuroanatomy, motor learning, cerebellum, parietal cortex, basal ganglia, medial temporal lobe, corticospinal tract, state estimation, optimal control, reward, cost-to-go, internal models, proprioception, premotor cortex, primary motor cortex
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Motor Cortex, Motor Skills, Neuroanatomy, Psychomotor Performance, Computational Biology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review