MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589523243 · doi:10.3758/s13415-017-0502-3

Reward-based contextual learning supported by anterior cingulate cortex

2017· article· en· W2589523243 on OpenAlexaff
Akina Umemoto, Azadeh HajiHosseini, Michael E. Yates, Clay B. Holroyd

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnterior cingulate cortexPsychologyTask (project management)CognitionCognitive psychologyIowa gambling taskAction (physics)Cingulate cortexCognitive neuroscienceAction selectionReward systemControl (management)NeurosciencePerceptionComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is commonly associated with cognitive control and decision making, but its specific function is highly debated. To explore a recent theory that the ACC learns the reward values of task contexts (Holroyd & McClure in Psychological Review, 122, 54-83, 2015; Holroyd & Yeung in Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 122-128, 2012), we recorded the event-related brain potentials (ERPs) from participants as they played a novel gambling task. The participants were first required to select from among three games in one "virtual casino," and subsequently they were required to select from among three different games in a different virtual casino; unbeknownst to them, the payoffs for the games were higher in one casino than in the other. Analysis of the reward positivity, an ERP component believed to reflect reward-related signals carried to the ACC by the midbrain dopamine system, revealed that the ACC is sensitive to differences in the reward values associated with both the casinos and the games inside the casinos, indicating that participants learned the values of the contexts in which rewards were delivered. These results highlight the importance of the ACC in learning the reward values of task contexts in order to guide action selection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCognitive Affective & Behavioral NeuroscienceSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207