Representations of the intrinsic value of information in mouse orbitofrontal cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animals are motivated to seek information that does not influence reward outcomes, suggesting that information has intrinsic value. We have developed an odor-based information seeking task that reveals that mice choose to receive information even though it does not alter the reward outcome. Moreover, mice are willing to pay for information by sacrificing water reward, suggesting that information is of intrinsic value to a mouse. We used a microendoscope to reveal neural activity in orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) while mice learned the information seeking task. We observed the emergence of distinct populations of neurons responsive to odors predictive of information and odors predictive of water reward. A latent variable model recapitulated these different representations in the low-dimensional dynamics of OFC neuronal population activity. These data suggest that mice have evolved separate pathways to represent the intrinsic value of information and the extrinsic value of water reward. Thus, the desire to acquire knowledge is observed in mice, and the value of this information is represented in the OFC. The mouse now provides a facile experimental system to study the representation of the value of information, a higher cognitive variable.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".