The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Muscle Coordination Is Habitual Rather than Optimal
Open accessAbstract
When sharing load among multiple muscles, humans appear to select an optimal pattern of activation that minimizes costs such as the effort or variability of movement. How the nervous system achieves this behavior, however, is unknown. Here we show that contrary to predictions from optimal control theory, habitual muscle activation patterns are surprisingly robust to changes in limb biomechanics. We first developed a method to simulate joint forces in real time from electromyographic recordings of the wrist muscles. When the model was altered to simulate the effects of paralyzing a muscle, the subjects simply increased the recruitment of all muscles to accomplish the task, rather than recruiting only the useful muscles. When the model was altered to make the force output of one muscle unusually noisy, the subjects again persisted in recruiting all muscles rather than eliminating the noisy one. Such habitual coordination patterns were also unaffected by real modifications of biomechanics produced by selectively damaging a muscle without affecting sensory feedback. Subjects naturally use different patterns of muscle contraction to produce the same forces in different pronation–supination postures, but when the simulation was based on a posture different from the actual posture, the recruitment patterns tended to agree with the actual rather than the simulated posture. The results appear inconsistent with computation of motor programs by an optimal controller in the brain. Rather, the brain may learn and recall command programs that result in muscle coordination patterns generated by lower sensorimotor circuitry that are functionally “good-enough.”
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
Muscle function after exercise-induced muscle damage and rapid adaptation
CLARKSON, P. M., NOSAKA, K., & BRAUN, B. (1992) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/00005768-199205000-00004 · Cited by 970 · cited 1×
“Exercise-induced muscle damage can lead to large, temporary force decrements, but full recovery of force occurs within 2–3 weeks (Clarkson et al., 1992).”
BackgroundThe coordination of movement: optimal feedback control and beyond
Diedrichsen, J., Shadmehr, R., & Ivry, R. B. (2010) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.11.004 · Cited by 577
Cited by
The striatum: where skills and habits meet
Graybiel, A. M., & Grafton, S. T. (2015) · Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology · doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a021691 · Cited by 463
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
Metadata
- Authors
- de Rugy, A., Loeb, G. E., & Carroll, T. J.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2012-05-23
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 7384-7391
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W2133397121
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 8.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Muscle Coordination Is Habitual Rather than Optimal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.5792-11.2012
- The paper
- de Rugy, A., Loeb, G. E., & Carroll, T. J. (2012). Muscle Coordination Is Habitual Rather than Optimal. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.5792-11.2012
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.