The Urge to Decide and Act: Implications for Brain Function and Dysfunction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans and other animals are motivated to act so as to maximize their subjective reward rate. Here, we propose that reward rate maximization is accomplished by adjusting a context-dependent "urgency signal," which influences both the commitment to a developing action choice and the vigor with which the ensuing action is performed. We review behavioral and neurophysiological data suggesting that urgency is controlled by projections from the basal ganglia to cerebral cortical regions, influencing neural activity related to decision making as well as activity related to action execution. We also review evidence suggesting that different individuals possess specific policies for adjusting their urgency signal to particular contextual variables, such that urgency constitutes an individual trait which jointly influences a wide range of behavioral measures commonly related to the overall quality and hastiness of one's decisions and actions. Consequently, we argue that a central mechanism for reward rate maximization provides a potential link between personality traits such as impulsivity, as well as some of the motivation-related symptomology of clinical disorders such as depression and Parkinson's disease.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 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 it