4.5 Article

Energy optimization is a major objective in the real-time control of step width in human walking

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 91, Issue -, Pages 85-91

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.05.010

Keywords

Gait; Metabolic energetic cost; Biomechanics; Motor control; Neuromechanics

Funding

  1. Vanier Canadian Graduate Scholarship
  2. NSERC Discovery Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

People prefer to move in energetically optimal ways during walking. We recently found that this preference arises not just through evolution and development, but that the nervous system will continuously optimize step frequency in response to new energetic cost landscapes. Here we tested whether energy optimization is also a major objective in the nervous system's real-time control of step width using a device that can reshape the relationship between step width and energetic cost, shifting people's energy optimal step width. We accomplished this by changing the walking incline to apply an energetic penalty as a function of step width. We found that people didn't spontaneously initiate energy optimization, but instead required experience with a lower energetic cost step width. After initiating optimization, people adapted, on average, 3.5 standard deviations of their natural step width variability towards the new energy optimal width. Within hundreds of steps, they updated this as their new preferred width and rapidly returned to it when perturbed away. This new preferred width reduced energetic cost by roughly 14%, however, it was slightly narrower than the energetically optimal width, possibly due to non-energy objectives that may contribute to the nervous system's control of step width. Collectively, these findings suggest that the nervous systems of able-bodied people can continuously optimize energetic cost to determine preferred step width. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available