Kinematic error magnitude in the single-mass inverted pendulum model of human standing posture

Many postural control studies employ a single-mass inverted pendulum model (IPM) to represent the body during standing. However, it is not known to what degree and for what conditions the model's kinematic assumptions are valid.Our first objective was to quantify the IPM error, corresponding to a distance change between the ankle joint and center of mass (COM) during unrestricted, natural, unperturbed standing. A second objective was to quantify the error of having the ankle joint angle represent the COM angle.Eleven young participants completed five standing conditions: quiet standing with eyes open (EO) and closed (EC), voluntarily swaying forward (VSf) and backward (VSb), and freely moving (FR). The modified Helen-Hayes marker model was used to capture the body kinematics.The COM distance changed0.1% during EO and EC,0.25% during VSf and VSb, and1.5% during FR. The ankle angle moderately and positively correlated with the COM angle for EO, EC, and VSf, indicating that temporal features of the ankle angle moderately represent those of the COM angle. However, a considerable offset between the two existed, which needs to be considered when estimating the COM angle using the ankle angle. For VSb and FR, the correlation coefficients were low and/or negative, suggesting that a large error would result from using the ankle angle as an estimate of the COM angle.Insights from this study will be critical for deciding when to use the IPM in postural control research and for interpreting associated results.