Adapting to Dynamic Stimulus-Response Values: Differential Contributions of Inferior Frontal, Dorsomedial, and Dorsolateral Regions of Prefrontal Cortex to Decision Making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), and inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) have all been implicated in resolving decision conflict whether this conflict is generated by having to select between responses of similar value or by making selections following a reversal in reinforcement contingencies. However, work distinguishing their individual functional contributions remains preliminary. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to delineate the functional role of these systems with regard to both forms of decision conflict. Within dmPFC and dlPFC, blood oxygen level-dependent responses increased in response to decision conflict regardless of whether the conflict occurred in the context of a reduction in the difference in relative value between objects, or an error following a reversal of reinforcement contingencies. Conjunction analysis confirmed that overlapping regions of dmPFC and dlPFC were activated by both forms of decision conflict. Unlike these regions, however, activity in IFG was not modulated by reductions in the relative value of available options. Moreover, although all three regions of prefrontal cortex showed enhanced activity to reversal errors, only dmPFC and dlPFC were also modulated by the magnitude of value change during the reversal. These data are interpreted with reference to models of dmPFC, dlPFC, and IFG functioning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".