Orbitofrontal cortex and learning predictions of state transitions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Learning the transition structure of the environment – the probabilities of transitioning from one environmental state to another – is a key prerequisite for goal-directed planning and model-based decision making. To investigate the role of the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) in goal-directed planning and decision making, we used fMRI to assess univariate and multivariate activity in the OFC while humans experienced state transitions that varied in degree of surprise. Converging with recent evidence, we found that OFC activity was related to greater learning about transition structure. However, the observed relationship was inconsistent with a straightforward interpretation of OFC activity as representing a state prediction error that would facilitate learning of transitions via error-correcting mechanisms. The state prediction error hypothesis predicts that OFC activity at the time of observing an outcome should increase expectation of that same observed outcome on subsequent trials. Instead, our results showed that OFC activity was associated with increased expectation of the more probable outcome; that is, with more optimal predictions. These results suggest that the OFC is involved in updating or reinforcing a learned transition model on a trial-by-trial basis, specifically for the currently observed cue-outcome associations. Our findings add to the evidence of OFC involvement in learning state-to-state transition structure, while providing new constraints for algorithmic hypotheses regarding how these transitions are learned. Significance Statement The orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) has been implicated in model-based decision making—the kind of decisions that result from planning using an “environment model” of how current actions affect our future states. However, the widely suggested role of the OFC in representing expected values of future states is not sufficient to explain why the OFC would be critical for planning in particular. A new line of evidence implicates the OFC in learning about transition structure of the environment – a key component of the “environment model” used for planning. We investigate this function, adding to the growing literature on the role of the OFC in learning and decision making, while unveiling new questions about the algorithmic role of OFC in goal-directed planning.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".