ArticleAnimal cognition2017
Sure enough: efficient Bayesian learning and choice.
Article in Animal cognition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does Amount of Information Support Aesthetic Values?Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Two-dimensional reward evaluation in mice.Animal cognition · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Probabilistic decision-making is a general phenomenon in animal behavior, and has often been interpreted to reflect the relative certainty of animals' beliefs. Extensive neurological and behavioral results increasingly suggest that animal beliefs may be represented as probability distributions, with explicit accounting of uncertainty. Accordingly, we develop a model that describes decision-making in a manner consistent with this understanding of neuronal function in learning and conditioning. This first-order Markov, recursive Bayesian algorithm is as parsimonious as its minimalist point-estimate, Rescorla-Wagner analogue. We show that the Bayesian algorithm can reproduce naturalistic patterns of probabilistic foraging, in simulations of an experiment in bumblebees. We go on to show that the Bayesian algorithm can efficiently describe the behavior of several heuristic models of decision-making, and is consistent with the ubiquitous variation in choice that we observe within and between individuals in implementing heuristic decision-making. By describing learning and decision-making in a single Bayesian framework, we believe we can realistically unify descriptions of behavior across contexts and organisms. A unified cognitive model of this kind may facilitate descriptions of behavioral evolution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.