Search

The brain makes use of noisy sensory inputs to produce eye, head, or arm motion. In most instances, the brain combines this sensory information with predictions about future events. Here, we propose that Kalman filtering can account for the dynamics of both visually guided and predictive motor behaviors within one simple unifying mechanism. Our model relies on two Kalman filters: (1) one processing visual information about retinal input; and (2) one maintaining a dynamic internalmemoryof target motion. The outputs of both Kalman filters are then combined in a statistically optimal manner, i.e., weighted with respect to their reliability. The model was tested on data from several smooth pursuit experiments and reproduced all major characteristics of visually guided and predictive smooth pursuit. This contrasts with the common belief that anticipatory pursuit, pursuit maintenance during target blanking, and zero-lag pursuit of sinusoidally moving targets all result from different control systems. This is the first instance of a model integrating all aspects of pursuit dynamics within one coherent and simple model and without switching between different parallel mechanisms. Our model suggests that the brain circuitry generating a pursuit command might be simpler than previously believed and only implement the functional equivalents of two Kalman filters whose outputs are optimally combined. It provides a general framework of how the brain can combine continuous sensory information with a dynamic internal memory and transform it into motor commands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The timing of an upcoming event depends on two factors: its temporal position, proximal or distal with respect to the present moment, and the unavoidable stochastic variability around this temporal position. We searched for a general mechanism that could describe how these two factors influence the anticipation of an upcoming event in an oculomotor task. Monkeys were trained to pursue a moving target with their eyes. During a delay period inserted before target motion onset, anticipatory pursuit responses were frequently observed. We found that anticipatory movements were altered by the temporal position of the target. Increasing the timing uncertainty associated with the stimulus resulted in an increase in the width of the latency distribution of anticipatory pursuit. These results show that monkeys relied on an estimation of the changing probability of target motion onset as time elapsed during the delay to decide when to initiate an anticipatory smooth eye movement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For humans, visual tracking of moving stimuli often triggers catch-up saccades during smooth pursuit. The switch between these continuous and discrete eye movements is a trade-off between tolerating sustained position error (PE) when no saccade is triggered or a transient loss of vision during the saccade due to saccadic suppression. de Brouwer et al. (2002b) demonstrated that catch-up saccades were less likely to occur when the target re-crosses the fovea within 40-180 ms. To date, there is no mechanistic explanation for how the trigger decision is made by the brain. Recently, we proposed a stochastic decision model for saccade triggering during visual tracking (Coutinho et al., 2018) that relies on a probabilistic estimate of predicted PE (PE pred ). Informed by model predictions, we hypothesized that saccade trigger time length and variability will increase when pre-saccadic predicted errors are small or visual uncertainty is high (e.g., for blurred targets). Data collected from human participants performing a double step-ramp task showed that large pre-saccadic PE pred (>10°) produced short saccade trigger times regardless of the level of uncertainty while saccade trigger times preceded by small PE pred (<10°) significantly increased in length and variability, and more so for blurred targets. Our model also predicted increased signal-dependent noise (SDN) as retinal slip (RS) increases; in our data, this resulted in longer saccade trigger times and more smooth trials without saccades. In summary, our data supports our hypothesized predicted error-based decision process for coordinating saccades during smooth pursuit., (Copyright © 2020 Nachmani et al.)