Steering a Car to Intercept a Moving Target

In the first condition, subjects align their head and gaze in the direction in which the car is headed and center their gaze on the target. In the second condition, subjects point their head slightly off the direction in which the car is heading toward the target. In the first condition, this angle remained constant. In the second condition, however, the target bearing angle continuously changed. This suggests that the subjects used a constant strategy to steer a car towards the target, and that the gaze and head were coordinated to continuously acquire visual information.
Nulling changes in target bearing

The driving task of intercepting a moving target entails changing the target’s bearing with time. A model-based control approach could explain such a behavior, but requires visual information. In this article, we will discuss how a constant bearing model could be used to explain this adaptive heading adjustment.

The first hypothesis outlines that if the target is blurred, the driver will turn too slowly and miss the target’s interception point. This prediction would be confirmed if the target is slow and the participant had enough time to turn and null the target’s bearing. If the target was moving faster, the driver would experience an increasing negative constant error, and would have the most blurry view of the target.

The theoretical model of target interceptions includes the damping and stiffness terms kpsm and the distance term dm + c. The distance term dm compensates for the decrease in the target’s angular velocity with distance. great ideas for getting started identifies the variables that affect the interception of a moving target: the target’s bearing direction, the distance dm, and the target-heading angle (b = ph – psm).

Strobe Sport: baseball swing training equipment blog article is that the accuracy of interception is a function of the visual information that the driver has on hand. In our research, we found that reduced visibility significantly impairs interception accuracy and precision. We also found that total occlusion eliminated adaptive steering adjustments and yielded a qualitative increase in error. Furthermore, we found that locomotor interception relies heavily on current visual information and deteriorates when visual information is removed. This is consistent with on-line control and suggests that the steering system is guided by the current information and the target’s motion.
Model-based control

The task of steering a car to intercept a moving object is fundamentally a visuomotor one. However, our understanding of human visual interception strategy is unclear. While measurements of angular variables suggest three possible strategies, previous experimental paradigms have shown inconsistent results.

The constant bearing strategy involves maintaining the bearing direction based on the current visual information. In contrast, model-based control maintains the bearing direction based on a model of the target’s position. Both strategies were tested on participants walking towards a moving target in a virtual environment. However, participants’ perception of the target’s speed and position were affected by the blurring of the target’s visibility.

To simulate locomotor interception of a moving target, the researchers compared two different approaches: a dynamically-based model and a model with a time-delay. They found that the latter approach tended to give better results when the target was always visible and never partially obscured.

The motor strategy requires a motor strategy that anticipates the trajectory of the target and computes the best course of interception. Preprogramming a prototypical trajectory to predict the target’s trajectory greatly reduced the control load. To test the accuracy of the model, subjects were asked to hit a moving target using a cursor. The target velocity was randomized and the target position was randomized. Nevertheless, the subjects were able to detect the trajectories of the moving target and interpreted the trajectories by observing the target’s velocity.
Reversals in movement direction

Interestingly, reversals of movement direction were not consistently observed over the course of all trials of the same experimental condition. This behavior was found to depend on the timing of the first steering action. The earlier the action, the greater the reversal. These findings suggest that control strategies operating in manual and locomotor interception share some characteristics.

check out Strobe Sport blog article to football training equipment accounted for reversals in movement direction in the interception-by-steering task by examining the duration of the lag between the appearance of the target and the initiation of the steering process. This finding suggests that a delay in detecting the target motion may cause participants to incorrectly perceive the target as stationary.

Reversals of movement direction were most frequent under four conditions. These conditions included Retreat, Cross, and SIDE eccentricity. Trials without a reversal of movement direction were rare. However, a large variability in moment of initiation was observed for the Retreat and Cross target directions.

In contrast, the SIDE and Approach+ conditions did not have significant differences. However, there were differences between the lateral positions and the angles of approach. Therefore, the angles of approach and retreat affect the success rate. Both conditions affect the lateral positions and the distance to the target.


The results show that a reversal of movement direction when steering a car to intercept an object were most pronounced for the target moving in the transverse plane. Nevertheless, this result is not consistent with a reversal of movement direction during locomotor interception.

Strobe Sport
2737 E Arizona Biltmore Cir UNIT 28, Phoenix, AZ 85016
Phone: (707) 878-7623
https://www.strobesport.com/