Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26843636›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2016

Goal-Directed Decision Making with Spiking Neurons.

Johannes Friedrich, Máté Lengyel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The limits of personal experience.Frontiers in psychology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Optimism and pessimism in optimised replay.PLoS computational biology · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Learning task-state representations.Nature neuroscience · 2019
    Review
  15. Habits without values.Psychological review · 2019
    Article
  16. A review of inflammatory mechanism in airway diseases.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2019
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Neuromorphic Hardware Learns to Learn.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Johannes FriedrichComputational and Biological Learning Laboratory, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, United Kingdom, and j.friedrich@columbia.edu.
Máté LengyelComputational and Biological Learning Laboratory, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, United Kingdom, and Department of Cognitive Science, Central European University, Budapest 1051, Hungary.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7266-0049

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Behavioral and neuroscientific data on reward-based decision making point to a fundamental distinction between habitual and goal-directed action selection. The formation of habits, which requires simple updating of cached values, has been studied in great detail, and the reward prediction error theory of dopamine function has enjoyed prominent success in accounting for its neural bases. In contrast, the neural circuit mechanisms of goal-directed decision making, requiring extended iterative computations to estimate values online, are still unknown. Here we present a spiking neural network that provably solves the difficult online value estimation problem underlying goal-directed decision making in a near-optimal way and reproduces behavioral as well as neurophysiological experimental data on tasks ranging from simple binary choice to sequential decision making. Our model uses local plasticity rules to learn the synaptic weights of a simple neural network to achieve optimal performance and solves one-step decision-making tasks, commonly considered in neuroeconomics, as well as more challenging sequential decision-making tasks within 1 s. These decision times, and their parametric dependence on task parameters, as well as the final choice probabilities match behavioral data, whereas the evolution of neural activities in the network closely mimics neural responses recorded in frontal cortices during the execution of such tasks. Our theory provides a principled framework to understand the neural underpinning of goal-directed decision making and makes novel predictions for sequential decision-making tasks with multiple rewards. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Goal-directed actions requiring prospective planning pervade decision making, but their circuit-level mechanisms remain elusive. We show how a model circuit of biologically realistic spiking neurons can solve this computationally challenging problem in a novel way. The synaptic weights of our network can be learned using local plasticity rules such that its dynamics devise a near-optimal plan of action. By systematically comparing our model results to experimental data, we show that it reproduces behavioral decision times and choice probabilities as well as neural responses in a rich set of tasks. Our results thus offer the first biologically realistic account for complex goal-directed decision making at a computational, algorithmic, and implementational level.

Indexed as

GoalsNeural Networks, ComputerAction PotentialsAnimalsChoice BehaviorDecision MakingNeuronsRatsReinforcement, Psychologycomputational modelingdecision makingneuroeconomicsplanningreinforcement learningspiking neurons

Identifiers

PMID26843636
PMCPMC4737768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.