Atypical processing of uncertainty in individuals at risk for psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current theories of psychosis highlight the role of abnormal learning signals, i.e., prediction errors (PEs) and uncertainty, in the formation of delusional beliefs. We employed computational analyses of behaviour and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine whether such abnormalities are evident in clinical high risk (CHR) individuals. Non-medicated CHR individuals (n = 13) and control participants (n = 13) performed a probabilistic learning paradigm during fMRI data acquisition. We used a hierarchical Bayesian model to infer subject-specific computations from behaviour - with a focus on PEs and uncertainty (or its inverse, precision) at different levels, including environmental 'volatility' - and used these computational quantities for analyses of fMRI data. Computational modelling of CHR individuals' behaviour indicated volatility estimates converged to significantly higher levels than in controls. Model-based fMRI demonstrated increased activity in prefrontal and insular regions of CHR individuals in response to precision-weighted low-level outcome PEs, while activations of prefrontal, orbitofrontal and anterior insula cortex by higher-level PEs (that serve to update volatility estimates) were reduced. Additionally, prefrontal cortical activity in response to outcome PEs in CHR was negatively associated with clinical measures of global functioning. Our results suggest a multi-faceted learning abnormality in CHR individuals under conditions of environmental uncertainty, comprising higher levels of volatility estimates combined with reduced cortical activation, and abnormally high activations in prefrontal and insular areas by precision-weighted outcome PEs. This atypical representation of high- and low-level learning signals might reflect a predisposition to delusion formation.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".