Serotonin predictively encodes value
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The in vivo responses of dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) serotonin neurons to emotionally-salient stimuli are a puzzle. Existing theories centred on reward, surprise, or uncertainty individually account for some aspects of serotonergic activity but not others. Here we find a unifying perspective in a biologically-constrained predictive code for cumulative future reward, a quantity called state value in reinforcement learning. Through simulations of trace conditioning experiments common in the serotonin literature, we show that our theory, called value prediction, intuitively explains phasic activation by both rewards and punishments, preference for surprising rewards but absence of a corresponding preference for punishments, and contextual modulation of tonic firing—observations that currently form the basis of many and varied serotonergic theories. Next, we re-analyzed data from a recent experiment and found serotonin neurons with activity patterns that are a surprisingly close match: our theory predicts the marginal effect of reward history on population activity with a precision ≪0.1 Hz neuron −1 . Finally, we directly compared against quantitative formulations of existing ideas and found that our theory best explains both within-trial activity dynamics and trial-to-trial modulations, offering performance usually several times better than the closest alternative. Overall, our results show that previous models are not wrong, but incomplete, and that reward, surprise, salience, and uncertainty are simply different faces of a predictively-encoded value signal. By unifying previous theories, our work represents an important step towards understanding the potentially heterogeneous computational roles of serotonin in learning, behaviour, and beyond.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".