Information processing in dorsal striatum subregions during instrumental learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has suggested that the functions of the dorsomedial (DMS) and dorsolateral (DLS) striatum are dissociable, the former mediating goal-directed action-outcome (A-O) associations and the latter habitual stimulus-response (S-R) associations.Some of this evidence was obtained using different schedules of reinforcement in operant tasks, in combination with reinforcer devaluation.The present experiments used different versions of the win-stay task and single-solution T-maze tasks to assess the role of dorsal striatum subregions in instrumental learning.In contrast to previous studies, DMS but not DLS lesions impaired win-stay learning in both a conventional and in an automated radial maze, in which rats were allowed to obtain food multiple times from the same arms.This suggests that win-stay performance was due primarily to A-O associations.Consistent with this conclusion, devaluation of the reinforcer impaired the performance of control rats but not that of rats with either DMS or DLS lesions.This suggests that the rats also acquired S-R associations which were revealed when A-O associations were eliminated by the lesions.It was hypothesized that hippocampus learning to avoid revisiting baited arms suppresses DLS-based S-R associations, making win-stay performance dependent on DMS-based A-O associations.When the reinforcer was delivered on an interval schedule in the win-stay task both DMS and DLS lesions impaired performance, and reinforcer devaluation had no effect, suggesting that the interval schedule promoted S-R learning.Single-solution T-maze tasks were studied in an attempt to understand the roles of the striatal subregions in the components of win-stay learning.The results suggested that the DMS is required for the ability to acquire instrumental reinforcement contingencies with a proximal cue, a spatial location or a body turn.The availability of extramaze cues (EMCs) interfered with learning the cue task but not the turn or place tasks.DLS lesions also impaired cue learning (upon removal of EMCs), retarded but did not eliminate learning in the turn task, and enhanced learning in the place task when EMCs were available.Overall, these findings indicate that numerous different kinds of learning occur simultaneously and interact with each other in maze learning situations.Neurotoxically selective lesions of the striatal patch compartment had no significant effects on overall learning rates in the cue, turn or place tasks, but there were significant correlations between the residual patch area and several aspects of performance in the group of lesioned rats.The findings suggest that the patch compartment may mediate functions that can influence maze performance although its involvement may not be central to these forms of instrumental learning.Résumé Des recherches antérieures ont révélé que les fonctions de la partie dorsomédiane (DMS) et dorsolatérale (DLS) du corps strié sont dissociables, la première acquiert des associations entre une action et un objectif (A-O) et la dernière acquiert des associations entre un stimulus et une action/réponse (S-R).Certaines de ces preuves ont été obtenues en utilisant différents programmes de renforcement, en combinaison avec la dévaluation de la récompense.La présente série d'expériences a examiné le rôle des sous-régions du corps strié dorsal dans l'apprentissage instrumental, en utilisant différentes versions de la tâche win-stay et celles employant le labyrinthe en T. Contrairement aux résultats antérieurs, des lésions du DMS mais pas du DLS his tremendous help throughout my graduate studies at McGill University.His insight and guidance helped shaping my identity as a researcher and scientific writer.I would like to thank all the members of my advisory committee, Dr. Andrew Baker, Dr. Paul Clarke and Dr. Maria Pompeiano for their thoughtful comments and feedback for the work presented in this dissertation.I would also like to
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) | 0.001 | 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".