Literature DB >> 36177341

Inferring learning rules from animal decision-making.

Zoe C Ashwood1,2, Nicholas A Roy1, Ji Hyun Bak3, Jonathan W Pillow1,4.   

Abstract

How do animals learn? This remains an elusive question in neuroscience. Whereas reinforcement learning often focuses on the design of algorithms that enable artificial agents to efficiently learn new tasks, here we develop a modeling framework to directly infer the empirical learning rules that animals use to acquire new behaviors. Our method efficiently infers the trial-to-trial changes in an animal's policy, and decomposes those changes into a learning component and a noise component. Specifically, this allows us to: (i) compare different learning rules and objective functions that an animal may be using to update its policy; (ii) estimate distinct learning rates for different parameters of an animal's policy; (iii) identify variations in learning across cohorts of animals; and (iv) uncover trial-to-trial changes that are not captured by normative learning rules. After validating our framework on simulated choice data, we applied our model to data from rats and mice learning perceptual decision-making tasks. We found that certain learning rules were far more capable of explaining trial-to-trial changes in an animal's policy. Whereas the average contribution of the conventional REINFORCE learning rule to the policy update for mice learning the International Brain Laboratory's task was just 30%, we found that adding baseline parameters allowed the learning rule to explain 92% of the animals' policy updates under our model. Intriguingly, the best-fitting learning rates and baseline values indicate that an animal's policy update, at each trial, does not occur in the direction that maximizes expected reward. Understanding how an animal transitions from chance-level to high-accuracy performance when learning a new task not only provides neuroscientists with insight into their animals, but also provides concrete examples of biological learning algorithms to the machine learning community.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 36177341      PMCID: PMC9518972     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Neural Inf Process Syst        ISSN: 1049-5258


  20 in total

1.  The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit.

Authors:  F A Wichmann; N J Hill
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2001-11

2.  Quantifying the effect of intertrial dependence on perceptual decisions.

Authors:  Ingo Fründ; Felix A Wichmann; Jakob H Macke
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Mice alternate between discrete strategies during perceptual decision-making.

Authors:  Zoe C Ashwood; Nicholas A Roy; Iris R Stone; Anne E Urai; Anne K Churchland; Alexandre Pouget; Jonathan W Pillow
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 28.771

Review 4.  A new look at state-space models for neural data.

Authors:  Liam Paninski; Yashar Ahmadian; Daniel Gil Ferreira; Shinsuke Koyama; Kamiar Rahnama Rad; Michael Vidne; Joshua Vogelstein; Wei Wu
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2009-08-01       Impact factor: 1.621

5.  Posterior parietal cortex represents sensory history and mediates its effects on behaviour.

Authors:  Athena Akrami; Charles D Kopec; Mathew E Diamond; Carlos D Brody
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Lapses in perceptual decisions reflect exploration.

Authors:  Sashank Pisupati; Lital Chartarifsky-Lynn; Anup Khanal; Anne K Churchland
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 8.140

7.  Extracting the dynamics of behavior in sensory decision-making experiments.

Authors:  Nicholas A Roy; Ji Hyun Bak; Athena Akrami; Carlos D Brody; Jonathan W Pillow
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 17.173

8.  Anxiety, avoidance, and sequential evaluation.

Authors:  Samuel Zorowitz; Ida Momennejad; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  Comput Psychiatr       Date:  2020-03-01

9.  Standardized and reproducible measurement of decision-making in mice.

Authors:  Valeria Aguillon-Rodriguez; Dora Angelaki; Hannah Bayer; Niccolo Bonacchi; Matteo Carandini; Fanny Cazettes; Gaelle Chapuis; Anne K Churchland; Yang Dan; Eric Dewitt; Mayo Faulkner; Hamish Forrest; Laura Haetzel; Michael Häusser; Sonja B Hofer; Fei Hu; Anup Khanal; Christopher Krasniak; Ines Laranjeira; Zachary F Mainen; Guido Meijer; Nathaniel J Miska; Thomas D Mrsic-Flogel; Masayoshi Murakami; Jean-Paul Noel; Alejandro Pan-Vazquez; Cyrille Rossant; Joshua Sanders; Karolina Socha; Rebecca Terry; Anne E Urai; Hernando Vergara; Miles Wells; Christian J Wilson; Ilana B Witten; Lauren E Wool; Anthony M Zador
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 8.713

10.  Computational noise in reward-guided learning drives behavioral variability in volatile environments.

Authors:  Charles Findling; Vasilisa Skvortsova; Rémi Dromnelle; Stefano Palminteri; Valentin Wyart
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 24.884

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.