Reward associations do not explain transitive inference performance in monkeys by Greg Jensen, Yelda Alkan, Vincent P. Ferrera, and Herbert S. Terrace.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Fig. 2 2D-IR spectroscopy on liquid ZnPa under dry conditions.

Advertisements

Fig. 2 Changes in ice surface elevation, h, of Thwaites Glacier.

Fig. 4 Cross sections across-strike and along-strike of the collision zone (for profile locations see Fig. 3). Cross sections across-strike and along-strike.

Fig. 2 Cross-modal recognition between echolocation and vision.

Fig. 3 Comparison between predicted change in DT since the LIG and observed sea-level highstands. Comparison between predicted change in DT since the LIG.

Fig. 2 Box plots of water use with lateral lengths.

Fig. 2 Reaction kinetics in single-molecule junctions with OEEFs and in NMR tube. Reaction kinetics in single-molecule junctions with OEEFs and in NMR.

Fig. 1 Evolution of magnetic field lines around a foreshock bubble in the GSE-XY plane (z = 0): Results of a hybrid simulation. Evolution of magnetic field.

Fig. 2 Zeeman splitting of the plateau and associated Kondo feature.

Fig. 1 Examples of experimental stimuli and behavioral performance.

Fig. 3 Electron PSD in various regions.

Fig. 2 Some examples of weekly forecasts (the number of the forecasts are reported on Table 1). Some examples of weekly forecasts (the number of the forecasts.

Fig. 4 Resynthesized complex boronic acid derivatives based on different scaffolds on a millimole scale and corresponding yields. Resynthesized complex.

HT synthesis of boronic acids using the building block approach

Fig. 6 Comparison of properties of water models.

Fig. 3 Observed and modeled basal tilt rates.

Fig. 3 Hippocampal theta oscillations during goal-directed navigation.

Fig. 2 Reference-fixing experiment, results.

Fig. 2 Ferroelectric domains resolved in WTe2 single crystals.

Fig. 4 Response of a swarm model.

Fig. 1 Mean swarm response to an oscillating swarm marker.

Prediction of income with the Big Five PTs and cognitive ability

Fig. 3 Scan rate effects on the layer edge current.

Fig. 1 Experimental apparatus used to train and test free-flying bees on their capacity to learn addition and subtraction. Experimental apparatus used.

Fig. 1 Virtual navigation task and behavioral data.

Fig. 1 Product lifetime distributions for the eight industrial use sectors plotted as log-normal probability distribution functions (PDF). Product lifetime.

Fig. 2 Full-frame images recording the violation of a Bell inequality in four images. Full-frame images recording the violation of a Bell inequality in.

Fig. 3 Affective responses by exchange condition (PR and RE), level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner.

Fig. 1 Proportions of normative beliefs by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner.

Estimated response accuracy for critical pairs at the trial of testing

Eruptive history of the Campi Flegrei caldera during the last 15 ka

Emergence of resonances and prediction of distinct network responses

Fig. 1 Experimental and analytic procedure.

Fig. 3 2D horizontal Br−tracer and cable bacteria distributions.

Fig. 4 Model of the average SSE.

Fig. 2 Configuration and composition of urban green space.

Fig. 2 Variation of the SHC with carrier lifetime.

Fig. 2 EUV TG signal. EUV TG signal. Black lines in (A), (B), and (C) are the EUV TG signals from Si3N4 membranes at LTG = 110, 85, and 28 nm, respectively,

Fig. 4 EUV TG signal from Si.

Fig. 3 Load dependence of friction force and corresponding COF.

by Jacqueline Austermann, Jerry X

Fig. 4 Evolution of fraction of sickled RBCs under hypoxia.

Fig. 3 Characterization of the current-induced effective fields.

Fig. 2 Results of the learning and testing phases.

Contrast agent uptake for the four different groups of MMA mice

Fig. 4 In vivo FF results for MMA mice.

Fig. 6 Global sensitivity analysis illustrates the key model parameters that determine the sickling of RBCs. Global sensitivity analysis illustrates the.

by Patrick Francois, Thomas Fujiwara, and Tanguy van Ypersele

Fig. 3 Large-scale patterns controlling the low-level jet from the Gulf of Mexico and moisture over the SGP. Large-scale patterns controlling the low-level.

Fig. 4 Relationships between light and economic parameters.

Fig. 3 Evaluating the accuracy of speech separation and attention decoding methods. Evaluating the accuracy of speech separation and attention decoding.

Relationships between species richness and temperature or latitude

Fig. 4 BS-SEM images, ternary diagrams, and phase maps for the text and reverse sides of the TS. BS-SEM images, ternary diagrams, and phase maps for the.

Fig. 1 Location of the Jirzankal Cemetery.

Fig. 4 CO2 emission changes triggered by the JJJ clean air policy.

Fig. 3 Information storage substates.

Fig. 3 Maximal energy intake.

Fig. 2 Comparison of the observed DRs and the estimates by the VR model and FL. Comparison of the observed DRs and the estimates by the VR model and FL.

Fig. 2 Particles detected in snow samples collected at different locations from Europe to the Arctic. Particles detected in snow samples collected at different.

Fig. 4 Mapping of abundance of the most dominant bacterial and archaeal phyla across France. Mapping of abundance of the most dominant bacterial and archaeal.

Fig. 2 Proton spectrum from 40 GeV to 100 TeV measured with DAMPE (red filled circles). Proton spectrum from 40 GeV to 100 TeV measured with DAMPE (red.

Fig. 2 Effects of elevated Pco2 on temperature-dependent oxygen consumption rates (MO2) and growth of Atlantic cod embryos and Polar cod embryos (right).

Fig. 5 Density plots showing the relationship between growth responses to extreme events and site-level mean precipitation from all sites (N = 1314). Density.

Fig. 3 High-tide flood extent at water levels of 1. 73, 2. 03, 2

Fig. 4 Behavior of resistance peak near density nm = 5.

Distribution of applications from AA/B scientists across topics

Fig. 2 Speaker-independent speech separation with ODAN.

Fig. 4 Responses of forest growth to seasonal precipitation extremes.

Fig. 1 Atomic structure of U1−xThxSb2.

Fig. 5 Modeling of the ASE threshold using the kinetic equations and experimental parameter inputs. Modeling of the ASE threshold using the kinetic equations.

Presentation transcript:

Reward associations do not explain transitive inference performance in monkeys by Greg Jensen, Yelda Alkan, Vincent P. Ferrera, and Herbert S. Terrace Science Volume 5(7):eaaw2089 July 31, 2019 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 1 Experimental and analytic procedure. Experimental and analytic procedure. (A) Subjects learned the ordering of seven-item lists, consisting of images (A, B, C, etc.). The correct item is always the item that occurs early in the list (e.g., B is correct for the pair BC). (B) Trial structure. After touching a start stimulus, subjects see two images. Touching the correct stimulus yields rewards of varying magnitude. Incorrect responses yield no reward and a brief time-out period. (C) Stimuli were presented in pairs. Training sessions presented only adjacent pairs, outlined in blue. Testing sessions presented all pairs. Reward amounts depended on the rank of the correct stimulus. The “reverse gradient” delivered one drop of water for correct responses to A, two drops for correct responses to B, etc. This gradient is labeled “reverse” because the overall expected value of F exceeds that of E, although choosing F when the EF pair is presented results in no reward. Thus, expected value cannot be used to guide which choice is correct. The “concordant gradient” delivered six drops for correct choices of A, five for B, etc. Therefore, the stimulus with the higher expected value is concordant with the correct choice. (D) Bayesian model for estimating stimulus position from observed response accuracy. Subjects are presumed to make use of a linear representation with uncertain stimulus positions. We assume that this representation takes the form of a normal distribution with some mean and SD for each stimulus. To infer these parameters, we estimated p(correct) for each pair and transformed this to the area above zero of some z distribution. Inferring the parameters in our representation is then done as a simultaneous estimation problem, implemented using Stan. Stimuli adapted from images in the public domain. Greg Jensen et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw2089 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 2 Subjects retained the same list of stimuli for each set of training and testing sessions and then were presented with a new list at the start of the next training session. Subjects retained the same list of stimuli for each set of training and testing sessions and then were presented with a new list at the start of the next training session. Vertical dashed lines indicate a break lasting 1 year. (A) Population estimates of response accuracy (black) for each session. Chance is indicated by the dotted lines. Red circles correspond to the exploratory Q-learner, fit to the observed data. Blue circles correspond to the exploitative Q-learner, based on a previous study (12). (B) Peaks of inferred position distributions of each stimulus in subjects’ representations. Red, A; orange, B; green, C; cyan, D; blue, E; violet, F; and black, G. Subjects reconstructed the stimulus order in the concordant gradient condition, and did so approximately in the reverse gradient condition, with the exception of stimulus A. (C) Average number of the 21 stimulus pairs that fell in the correct order, based on the model estimates in the above panel. The red dotted line indicates how many pairs would be ordered correctly if subjects used expected values as the basis for ordering. (D) Support of the evidence for the positions in the inferred representation being organized according to a strictly linear representation (in red), relative to the expected values (in blue), according to a Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) analysis. Subjects tended to be equivocal, or to favor the expected value, during the first few sessions of training. However, late in training, and throughout the testing phase, the inferred representations more closely resembled a linear ordering of stimuli with uniform spacing. (E to H) Same as (A) to (D), respectively, but based on pooling data across the six lists. Greg Jensen et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw2089 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 3 Results of session-by-session binomial regression estimation of response accuracy. Results of session-by-session binomial regression estimation of response accuracy. Shaded intervals represent the 95% credible interval for the population estimate. (A) Overall estimated response accuracy for each session (black circles), as well as subject-level estimates of performance (white diamonds). (B) Estimated regression parameters for the effects of symbolic distance (blue) and reward magnitude (red), plotted on the logit scale. Distance effects could only be estimated for testing phases, as all stimulus pairs during training had the same symbolic distance. Greg Jensen et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw2089 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 4 Parameter estimates for binomial regression of response accuracy, pooled across the six lists learned in a given phase, plotted on the logit scale. Parameter estimates for binomial regression of response accuracy, pooled across the six lists learned in a given phase, plotted on the logit scale. Boxes represent the 80% credible interval for the population estimate, while whiskers represent the 95% credible interval. (A) Population estimates of the session intercepts, representing overall response accuracy (i.e., a value of 0.0 denotes chance performance). (B) Population estimates of the effect of symbolic distance. (C) Population estimates of the effect of reward magnitude. (D to F) Same as (A) to (C), respectively, but subject-level parameters estimated for each of the four subjects. (G to I) Posterior differences between the population-level parameters of the concordant gradient and reverse gradient conditions. (J to L) Posterior differences between the subject-level parameters. Greg Jensen et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw2089 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 5 Response accuracy for all pairs presented during the last session of training and the first session of testing, based on the parameters reported in Fig. 4. Response accuracy for all pairs presented during the last session of training and the first session of testing, based on the parameters reported in Fig. 4. Circles represent the raw empirical estimates, independent of the model fit. Boxes are centered at the mean population accuracy, with their upper and lower extent representing the 80% credible interval for the population estimate. Whiskers represent the 95% credible interval. Pairs are first organized by symbolic distance (red, distance 1; blue, distance 2; etc.) and then alphabetically (AB, BC, CD, etc.). Greg Jensen et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw2089 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 6 Estimated response accuracy for critical pairs at the trial of testing. Estimated response accuracy for critical pairs at the trial of testing. Boxes are centered at the mean population accuracy, with their upper and lower extent representing the 80% credible interval for the population estimate. Whiskers represent the 95% credible interval. (A) Population estimates of critical pair accuracy in the reverse gradient condition based on a binomial regression using only the first presentation of each pair. In addition, mean accuracy across all critical pairs, with corresponding uncertainty, is plotted in black. (B) Population estimates in the reverse gradient condition based on logistic regressions, extrapolating performance at the intercept (trial zero). Each pair was fit separately in this analysis, and the mean of the critical pairs was pooled across those estimates. (C) Population estimates of trial zero performance in the reverse gradient condition based on a logistic regression that incorporated data from all six pairs in both conditions, fitting both distance and reward effects. (D to F). Same as (A) to (C), respectively, but associated with the concordant gradient condition. Greg Jensen et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw2089 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).