Abstract
Fitts–law is a well established empirical formula, known for encapsulating the ‘speed-accuracy trade-off’ For discrete, manual movements from a starting location to a target, Fitts–law relates movement duration to the distance moved and target size. The widespread empirical success of the formula is suggestive of underlying principles of human movement control. There have been previous attempts to relate Fitts–law to engineering-type control hypotheses and it has been shown that the law is exactly consistent with the closed-loop step-response of a time-delayed, first-order system. Assuming only the operation of closed-loop feedback, either continuous or intermittent, this paper asks whether such feedback should be predictive or not predictive to be consistent with Fitts law. Since Fitts–law is equivalent to a time delay separated from a first-order system, known control theory implies that the controller must be predictive. A predictive controller moves the time-delay outside the feedback loop such that the closed-loop response can be separated into a time delay and rational function whereas a non- predictive controller retains a state delay within feedback loop which is not consistent with Fitts–law. Using sufficient parameters, a high-order non-predictive controller could approximately reproduce Fitts–law. However, such high-order, ‘non-parametric’controllers are essentially empirical in nature, without physical meaning, and therefore are conceptually inferior to the predictive controller. It is a new insight that using closed-loop feedback, prediction is required to physically explain Fitts–law. The implication is that prediction is an inherent part of the ‘speed-accuracy trade-off’
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bays PM, Wolpert DM (2007) Computational principles of sensorimotor control that minimize uncertainty and variability. J Physiol 578(2): 387–96
Beggs WD, Howarth CI (1972) The accuracy of aiming at a target. some further evidence for a theory of intermittent control. Acta Psychol 36: 171–77
Bhushan N, Shadmehr R (1999a) Computational nature of human adaptive control during learning of reaching movements in force fields. Biol Cybern 81(1): 39–0
Bhushan N, Shadmehr R (1999b) Evidence for a forward dynamics model in human adaptive control. In: Kearns MS, Solla SA, Cohn DA(eds) Advances in neural processing systems, vol 11. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 3–
Cannon DJ (1994) Experiments with a target-threshold control theory model for deriving Fitts–law parameters for human-machine systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 24(8): 1089–098
Connelly EM (1984) A control model: an alternative interpretation of fitts–law. In: Proceedings 28th annual meeting of the human factors society, San Antonio, TX
Craik KJ (1947) Theory of human operators in control systems: Part 1, the operator as an engineering system. Br J Psychol 38: 56–1
Davidson PR, Wolpert DM (2005) Widespread access to predictive models in the motor system: A short review. J Neural Eng 2(3): S313-S319
Doeringer JA, Hogan N (1998) Intermittency in preplanned elbow movements persists in the absence of visual feedback. J Neurophysiol 80: 1787–799
Fitts PM (1954) The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 47(6): 3810–91
Furuta K, Iwase M, Hatakeyama S (2005) Internal model and saturating actuation in human operation from view of human-adaptive mechatronics. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 52: 1236–245
Gawthrop PJ, Jones RW, Sbarbaro DG (1996) Emulator-based control and internal model control: Complementary approaches to robust control design. Automatica 32(8): 1223–227
Gawthrop PJ (2002) Physical model-based intermittent predictive control. In: Kaczorek T (ed) Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics, pp 707–12, Szczecin, Poland, September 2002
Gawthrop PJ (2004) Intermittent constrained predictive control of mechanical systems. In: Petersen IR (ed) Proceedings of the 3rd IFAC Symposium on Mechatronic Systems, Manly, Australia, 2004
Gawthrop PJ, Ronco E (2000) A sensitivity bond graph approach to estimation and control of mechatronic systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st IFAC Conference on Mechatronic Systems, Darmstadt, September 2000
Gawthrop PJ, Ronco E (2002) Predictive pole-placement control with linear models. Automatica 38(3): 421–32
Gawthrop PJ, Wang L (2006) Intermittent predictive control of an inverted pendulum. Control Eng Pract 14(11): 1347–356
Harris CM, Wolpert DM (1998) Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning. Nature 394: 780–84
Jacobs OLR (1974) Introduction to control theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Jagacinski RJ, Flach JM (2003) Control theory for humans: quantitative approaches to modelling performance. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale
Kalman RE (1964) When is a linear control system optimal. Trans ASME J Basic Eng 86: 51–0
Kleinman D (1969) Optimal control of linear systems with time-delay and observation noise. Automat Control, IEEE Trans 14: 524–27
Kwakernaak H, Sivan R (1972) Linear optimal control systems. Wiley, New York
Lakie M, Caplan N, Loram ID (2003) Human balancing of an inverted pendulum with a compliant linkage: neural control by anticipatory intermittent bias. J Physiol 551(1): 357–70
Loram ID, Gawthrop P, Lakie M (2006) The frequency of human, manual adjustments in balancing an inverted pendulum is constrained by intrinsic physiological factors. J Physiol (Lond) 577(1): 403–16. (Published on-line: September 14, 2006)
Marshall JE (1979) Control of time-delay systems. Peter Peregrinus, London
McRuer D (1980) Human dynamics in man-machine systems. Automatica 16: 237–53
Meyer DE, Smith JEK, Kornblum S, Abrams RA, Wright CE (1990) Speed-accuracy tradeoffs in aimed movements: toward a theory of rapid voluntary action. In: Jeannerod M(eds) Attention and performance, vol XIII. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 173–26
Miall RC, Jackson JK (2006) Adaptation to visual feedback delays in manual tracking: Evidence against the smith predictor model of human visually guided action. Exp Brain Res 172: 77–4
Miall RC, Weir DJ, Stein JF (1993a) Intermittency in human manual tracking tasks. J Motor Behav 25: 530–3
Miall RC, Weir DJ, Wolpert DM, Stein JF (1993b) Is the cerebellum a Smith predictor. J Motor Behav 25: 2030–16
Miall RC, Wolpert DM (1996) Forward models for physiological motor control. Neural Netw 9: 1265–279
Neilson PD, Neilson MD, O’Dwyer NJ (1988) Internal models and intermittency: A theoretical account of human tracking behaviour. Biol Cybern 58: 101–12
Neilson PD (1999) Influence of intermittency and synergy on grasping. Motor Control 3: 280–84
Neilson PD, Neilson MD (2005) An overview of adaptive model theory: solving the problems of redundancy, resources, and nonlinear interactions in human movement control. J Neural Eng 2(3): S279-S312
Newton GC, Gould La, Kaiser JF (1957) Analytical design of linear feedback controls. Wiley, New York
Phillips CA, Repperger DW (1997) Why engineers should know and use fitts–law? In: Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology—Proceedings, vol 4. Wright State Univ, Dayton, United States, pp 1686–689
Plamondon R, Alimi AM (1997) Speed/accuracy trade-offs in target-directed movements. Behav Brain Sci 20: 279–49
Ronco E, Arsan T, Gawthrop PJ (1999) Open-loop intermittent feedback control: practical continuous-time GPC. IEE Proc Part D: Control Theory Appl 146(5): 426–34
Sage AP, Melsa JJ (1971) Estimation theory with applications to communication and control. McGraw-Hill, New York
Smith OJM (1959) A controller to overcome dead-time. ISA Trans 6(2): 28–3
Soukoreff RW, MacKenzie IS (2004) Towards a standard for pointing device evaluation, perspectives on 27 years of fitts–law research in hci. Int J Hum Comput Stud 61(6): 751–89
VanDer Kooij H, Jacobs R, Koopman B, Grootenboer H (1999) A multisensory integration model of human stance control. Biol Cybern 80: 299–08
Wickens CD, Hollands JG (2000) Engineering psychology and human performance, 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Wolpert DM, Chris Miall R, Kawato M (1998) Internal models in the cerebellum. Trends Cogn Sci 2: 338–47
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gawthrop, P., Lakie, M. & Loram, I. Predictive feedback control and Fitts–law. Biol Cybern 98, 229–238 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-007-0206-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-007-0206-9