ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2021
Why and how the brain weights contributions from a mixture of experts.
Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Neural competition between prefrontal and auditory cortex constrains novel sound strategy learning.Science advances · 2026Article
- Model-based and model-free valuation signals in the human brain vary markedly in relation to individual differences in behavioral control.Cell reports · 2026Article
- Domain-specific contexts promote model-based decision making for basketball players.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A neural mechanism for online discovery of latent contexts.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- State Optimism as a State-Dependent Prior About Rewarding Outcomes.Computational brain & behavior · 2026Article
- Information uncertainty influences learning strategy from sequentially delayed rewards.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Computational and neural mechanisms underlying the influence of action affordances on value learning.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Whom do we prefer to learn from in observational reinforcement learning?PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Contribution of amygdala to dynamic model arbitration under uncertainty.Nature communications · 2025Article
- An Information-Theoretic Framework for Understanding Learning and Choice Under Uncertainty.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Model-based and model-free valuation signals in the human brain vary markedly in their relationship to individual differences in behavioral control.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Disorders of compulsivity: Deficits in arbitrating learning strategies.Addiction biology · 2024Article
- Defending and defining compulsive behaviour in addiction.Addiction biology · 2024Article
- Neurocomputational model of compulsivity: deviating from an uncertain goal-directed system.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Heterogeneity in strategy use during arbitration between experiential and observational learning.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Surprise-minimization as a solution to the structural credit assignment problem.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Neurocomputational mechanisms involved in adaptation to fluctuating intentions of others.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Active reinforcement learning versus action bias and hysteresis: control with a mixture of experts and nonexperts.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Decision heuristics in contexts integrating action selection and execution.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It has long been suggested that human behavior reflects the contributions of multiple systems that cooperate or compete for behavioral control. Here we propose that the brain acts as a "Mixture of Experts" in which different expert systems propose strategies for action. It will be argued that the brain determines which experts should control behavior at any one moment in time by keeping track of the reliability of the predictions within each system, and by allocating control over behavior in a manner that depends on the relative reliabilities across experts. fMRI and neurostimulation studies suggest a specific contribution of the anterior prefrontal cortex in this process. Further, such a mechanism also takes into consideration the complexity of the expert, favoring simpler over more cognitively complex experts. Results from the study of different expert systems in both experiential and social learning domains hint at the possibility that this reliability-based control mechanism is domain general, exerting control over many different expert systems simultaneously in order to produce sophisticated behavior.
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.