MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409994915 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.29.25326698

Explore-exploit instability reveals computational decision-making heterogeneity in early psychosis

2025· preprint· en· W4409994915 on OpenAlexaff
Cathy S. Chen, Evan Knep, Veldon-James Laurie, Olivia L. Calvin, R. Becket Ebitz, Melissa Fisher, Michael‐Paul Schallmo, Scott R. Sponheim, Matthew V. Chafee, Sarah R. Heilbronner, Nicola M. Grissom, A. David Redish, Angus W. MacDonald, Sophia Vinogradov, Caroline Demro

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPsychosisPsychologyNormativeMoodCognitionClinical psychologySchizotypyCognitive psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Hypothesis Psychosis spectrum illnesses are characterized by impaired goal-directed behavior and significant clinical and neurophysiological heterogeneity. This study investigated cognitive heterogeneity by applying computational modeling to trial-wise decision making task behavior. Study Design 75 participants with Early Psychosis (EP) and 68 controls completed a dynamic decision-making task during two baseline sessions as part of a larger longitudinal fMRI study. Study Results Consistent with prior studies, EP exhibited more choice switching. However, this was not explained by reward learning deficits as no group difference in reward acquisition was found. Instead, a Hidden Markov model fit to choice sequences revealed increased exploration as a result of higher probability of transition from exploitation to exploration in EP, leaving a favorable option too soon. A Bayesian learner model that estimates both value and uncertainty characterized EP behavior better than traditional RL models with fixed learning rates. Results of computational modeling implicated elevated uncertainty sensitivity and decision noise as independent contributors to suboptimal transition into exploration among EP. Task strategy yielded three computational subtypes (normative, uncertainty-sensitive, high decision-noise) with unique cognitive and symptom profiles. Conclusions These specific microcognitive disruptions underlying the distinct neurocomputational subtypes are individually measurable and may have the potential for targeted interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→