The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do Humans Optimally Exploit Redundancy to Control Step Variability in Walking?
Open accessAbstract
It is widely accepted that humans and animals minimize energetic cost while walking. While such principles predict average behavior, they do not explain the variability observed in walking. For robust performance, walking movements must adapt at each step, not just on average. Here, we propose an analytical framework that reconciles issues of optimality, redundancy, and stochasticity. For human treadmill walking, we defined a goal function to formulate a precise mathematical definition of one possible control strategy: maintain constant speed at each stride. We recorded stride times and stride lengths from healthy subjects walking at five speeds. The specified goal function yielded a decomposition of stride-to-stride variations into new gait variables explicitly related to achieving the hypothesized strategy. Subjects exhibited greatly decreased variability for goal-relevant gait fluctuations directly related to achieving this strategy, but far greater variability for goal-irrelevant fluctuations. More importantly, humans immediately corrected goal-relevant deviations at each successive stride, while allowing goal-irrelevant deviations to persist across multiple strides. To demonstrate that this was not the only strategy people could have used to successfully accomplish the task, we created three surrogate data sets. Each tested a specific alternative hypothesis that subjects used a different strategy that made no reference to the hypothesized goal function. Humans did not adopt any of these viable alternative strategies. Finally, we developed a sequence of stochastic control models of stride-to-stride variability for walking, based on the Minimum Intervention Principle. We demonstrate that healthy humans are not precisely "optimal," but instead consistently slightly over-correct small deviations in walking speed at each stride. Our results reveal a new governing principle for regulating stride-to-stride fluctuations in human walking that acts independently of, but in parallel with, minimizing energetic cost. Thus, humans exploit task redundancies to achieve robust control while minimizing effort and allowing potentially beneficial motor variability.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination
Todorov, E., & Jordan, M. I. (2002) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn963 · Cited by 3,081
Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning
Harris, C. M., & Wolpert, D. M. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/29528 · Cited by 2,498
Optimality principles in sensorimotor control
Todorov, E. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1309 · Cited by 1,746
Dynamic Sensorimotor Interactions in Locomotion
Rossignol, S., Dubuc, R., & Gossard, J.-P. (2006) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00028.2005 · Cited by 1,096
What Is Stochastic Resonance? Definitions, Misconceptions, Debates, and Its Relevance to Biology
McDonnell, M. D., & Abbott, D. (2009) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000348 · Cited by 774
Evidence for the Flexible Sensorimotor Strategies Predicted by Optimal Feedback Control
Liu, D., & Todorov, E. (2007) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1110-06.2007 · Cited by 447
The influence of urgency on decision time
Reddi, B. A. J., & Carpenter, R. H. S. (2000) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/77739 · Cited by 411
Learning to move amid uncertainty
Scheidt, R. A., Dingwell, J. B., & Mussa-Ivaldi, F. A. (2001) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.2001.86.2.971 · Cited by 411
Self-citationAdaptive, Fast Walking in a Biped Robot under Neuronal Control and Learning
Manoonpong, P., Geng, T., Kulvicius, T., Porr, B., & Wörgötter, F. (2007) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030134 · Cited by 119
Cited by
The computational and neural basis of voluntary motor control and planning
Scott, S. H. (2012) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.09.008 · Cited by 317
Two independent contributions to step variability during over-ground human walking
Collins, S. H., & Kuo, A. D. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073597 · Cited by 129
Ojeda, L. V., Rebula, J. R., Kuo, A. D., & Adamczyk, P. G. (2015) · Medical Engineering & Physics · doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.06.010 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Dingwell, J. B., John, J., & Cusumano, J. P.
- Venue
- PLoS Computational Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2010-07-15
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e1000856
- ISSN
- 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7358
- OpenAlex
- W2160413527
- Cited by
- 194
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 7.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do Humans Optimally Exploit Redundancy to Control Step Variability in Walking? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000856
- The paper
- Dingwell, J. B., John, J., & Cusumano, J. P. (2010). Do Humans Optimally Exploit Redundancy to Control Step Variability in Walking? PLoS Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000856
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.