Learning signatures of decision making from many individuals playing the same game
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human behavior is incredibly complex and the factors that drive decision making--from instinct, to strategy, to biases between individuals--often vary over multiple timescales. In this paper, we design a predictive framework that learns representations to encode an individual's 'behavioral style', i.e. long-term behavioral trends, while simultaneously predicting future actions and choices. The model explicitly separates representations into three latent spaces: the recent past space, the short-term space, and the long-term space where we hope to capture individual differences. To simultaneously extract both global and local variables from complex human behavior, our method combines a multi-scale temporal convolutional network with latent prediction tasks, where we encourage embeddings across the entire sequence, as well as subsets of the sequence, to be mapped to similar points in the latent space. We develop and apply our method to a large-scale behavioral dataset from 1,000 humans playing a 3-armed bandit task, and analyze what our model's resulting embeddings reveal about the human decision making process. In addition to predicting future choices, we show that our model can learn rich representations of human behavior over multiple timescales and provide signatures of differences in individuals.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".