Motor prediction.

By D. M. Wolpert, J. Flanagan. Current Biology, 2001

1,046 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ff9b24e472b7b06883af9fec7edaa07d769ba20a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

From cognitivism to autopoiesis: towards a computational framework for the embodied mind (2016, background): “This simple computation can, for example, disambiguate internally vs. externally generated signals, and acts as a training signal to reﬁne motor commands (Miall and Wolpert 1996; Wolpert and Flanagan 2001).”
Retinotopic and non-retinotopic stimulus encoding in binocular rivalry and the involvement of feedback. (2008, neutral): “This copy of the motor command is thought to inform sensory areas of upcoming changes in visual input due to self-motion (Wexler & van Boxtel, 2005; Wolpert & Flanagan, 2001).”
A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. (2003, background): “On the basis of computational studies it has been proposed that the CNS internally simulates aspects of the sensorimotor loop in planning, control and learning (Kawato et al. 1987; Jordan 1995; Miall & Wolpert 1996; Wolpert & Flanagan 2001).”
Principles of sensorimotor learning (2011, background): “These predictions may also support a number of other movement-related functions including state estimation, likelihood estimation, sensory filtering, agency attribution and mental simulation 27 .”
Action Is Enabled by Systematic Misrepresentations (2017, background): “Active inference can thus account for the performance of neurotypical and of schizophrenia patients in the force-matching task. account is derived from work on motor control that involves efference copies and forward models (cf. Wolpert and Flanagan, 2001).”
Computational mechanisms of sensorimotor control. (2011, neutral): “This cancellation of self-generated sensory feedback would be used to increase the detection of any environmentally generated sensory information (Wolpert and Flanagan , 2001).”
Hierarchically organized behavior and its neural foundations: A reinforcement-learning perspective (2008, result): “The idea of action models, in general, also fits well with work on motor control (e.g., Wolpert & Flanagan, 2001), which strongly suggests the involvement of predictive models in the guidance of bodily movements.”
The case for motor involvement in perceiving conspecifics. (2005, background): “For example, in the motor control literature, theorists have proposed that motor commands are fed into a simulation device, called a forward model, that runs in parallel with the actually executed movement (Desmurget & Grafton, 2000; Miall & Reckless, 2002; Wolpert & Flanagan, 2001).”
Prediction, Cognition and the Brain (2009, background): “…(Bays et al., 2006) and, in addition to distinguishing between self-generated and externally produced movements, may be used to estimate the current or predict the future state of the system (Miall and Wolpert, 1996) as well as estimate more general context variables (Wolpert and Flanagan, 2001).”
Compensating time delays with neural predictions: are predictions sensory or motor? (2009, background): “Are these mechanisms sensory (Nijhawan 1997), motor (Wolpert & Flanagan 2001) or intermediate?”
When knowing can replace seeing in audiovisual integration of actions. (2009, neutral): “Thus, when presented with an acquired musical action the musician should be able to predict the sound by using a forward model (Kawato, 1999; Wolpert & Flanagan, 2001; Wolpert et al., 1995), which can be used to predict the sensory outcome of an action, without actually performing the action.”