Reply to comment

When I look back at last Thursday’s notes, the central pattern generator’s interest factor seems disappointing compared to other matters covered in class. For one, the CPG feels more tangible in principle than do other aspects of the brain like the I function or the mind.

I was searching for research and found a lot of robotic work pertaining to the CPG. Robotic movements are primarily governed by mathematical patterns to imitate those conducted by the CPG. Once study used a nonlinear oscillator equation to control the robot’s gait. The robot’s CPG mimic that of an organic being such that the output was unaffected by outside conditions, and had fast transitions because movement is steady. After reviewing this study and many others, I find the CPG to be fairly comprehensive in the fact that its principles can be easily generated in mechanics and physics. I don’t feel like the subject is debatable or controversial.

I was also thinking about evolution and its effect on CPG. CPG control automatic movements like walking. Evolution suggests man went from walking on all fours to walking on two legs. Surely, the CPG had to adjust as man changed its gait. How do innate patterns change in brain?

http://buchli.org/jonas/publications/buchli04.pdf