Separate Prefrontal-Subcortical Circuits Mediate Different Components of Risk-Based Decision Making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Choosing between smaller, assured rewards or larger, uncertain ones requires reconciliation of competing biases toward more certain or riskier options. We used disconnection and neuroanatomical techniques to reveal that separate, yet interconnected, neural pathways linking the medial prefrontal cortex (PFC), the basolateral amygdala (BLA), and nucleus accumbens (NAc) contribute to these different decision biases in rats. Disrupting communication between the BLA and NAc revealed that this subcortical circuit biases choice toward larger, uncertain rewards on a probabilistic discounting task. In contrast, disconnections between the BLA and PFC increased choice of the Large/Risky option. PFC-NAc disconnections did not affect choice but did increase choice latencies and trial omissions. Neuroanatomical studies confirmed that projection pathways carrying axons from BLA-to-PFC transverse a distinctly different route relative to PFC-to-BLA pathways (via the ventrolateral amydalofugal pathway and ventromedial internal capsule, respectively). We exploited these dissociable axonal pathways to selectively disrupt bottom-up and top-down communication between the BLA and PFC. Subsequent disconnection studies revealed that disruption of top-down (but not bottom-up) information transfer between the medial PFC and BLA increased choice of the larger, riskier option, suggesting that this circuit facilitates tracking of actions and outcomes to temper urges for riskier rewards as they become less profitable. These findings provide novel insight into the dynamic competition between these cortical/subcortical circuits that shape our decision biases and underlie conflicting urges when evaluating options that vary in terms of potential risks and rewards.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".