Phasic Dopamine Changes and Hebbian Mechanisms during Probabilistic Reversal Learning in Striatal Circuits: A Computational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive flexibility is essential to modify our behavior in a non-stationary environment and is often explored by reversal learning tasks. The basal ganglia (BG) dopaminergic system, under a top-down control of the pre-frontal cortex, is known to be involved in flexible action selection through reinforcement learning. However, how adaptive dopamine changes regulate this process and learning mechanisms for training the striatal synapses remain open questions. The current study uses a neurocomputational model of the BG, based on dopamine-dependent direct (Go) and indirect (NoGo) pathways, to investigate reinforcement learning in a probabilistic environment through a task that associates different stimuli to different actions. Here, we investigated: the efficacy of several versions of the Hebb rule, based on covariance between pre- and post-synaptic neurons, as well as the required control in phasic dopamine changes crucial to achieving a proper reversal learning. Furthermore, an original mechanism for modulating the phasic dopamine changes is proposed, assuming that the expected reward probability is coded by the activity of the winner Go neuron before a reward/punishment takes place. Simulations show that this original formulation for an automatic phasic dopamine control allows the achievement of a good flexible reversal even in difficult conditions. The current outcomes may contribute to understanding the mechanisms for active control of dopamine changes during flexible behavior. In perspective, it may be applied in neuropsychiatric or neurological disorders, such as Parkinson's or schizophrenia, in which reinforcement learning is impaired.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".