Hierarchical control over effortful behavior by rodent medial frontal cortex: A computational model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) has been the focus of intense research interest in recent years. Although separate theories relate ACC function variously to conflict monitoring, reward processing, action selection, decision making, and more, damage to the ACC mostly spares performance on tasks that exercise these functions, indicating that they are not in fact unique to the ACC. Further, most theories do not address the most salient consequence of ACC damage: impoverished action generation in the presence of normal motor ability. In this study we develop a computational model of the rodent medial prefrontal cortex that accounts for the behavioral sequelae of ACC damage, unifies many of the cognitive functions attributed to it, and provides a solution to an outstanding question in cognitive control research-how the control system determines and motivates what tasks to perform. The theory derives from recent developments in the formal study of hierarchical control and learning that highlight computational efficiencies afforded when collections of actions are represented based on their conjoint goals. According to this position, the ACC utilizes reward information to select tasks that are then accomplished through top-down control over action selection by the striatum. Computational simulations capture animal lesion data that implicate the medial prefrontal cortex in regulating physical and cognitive effort. Overall, this theory provides a unifying theoretical framework for understanding the ACC in terms of the pivotal role it plays in the hierarchical organization of effortful behavior.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".