ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
A Machine Learning Approach for Detecting Vicarious Trial and Error Behaviors.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. 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.
- Rhythmic modulation of dorsal hippocampus across distinct behavioral timescales during spatial set-shifting.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Flexible decision-making is related to strategy learning, vicarious trial and error, and medial prefrontal rhythms during spatial set-shifting.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2024Article
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
Vicarious trial and error behaviors (VTEs) indicate periods of indecision during decision-making, and have been proposed as a behavioral marker of deliberation. In order to understand the neural underpinnings of these putative bridges between behavior and neural dynamics, researchers need the ability to readily distinguish VTEs from non-VTEs. Here we utilize a small set of trajectory-based features and standard machine learning classifiers to identify VTEs from non-VTEs for rats performing a spatial delayed alternation task (SDA) on an elevated plus maze. We also show that previously reported features of the hippocampal field potential oscillation can be used in the same types of classifiers to separate VTEs from non-VTEs with above chance performance. However, we caution that the modest classifier success using hippocampal population dynamics does not identify many trials where VTEs occur, and show that combining oscillation-based features with trajectory-based features does not improve classifier performance compared to trajectory-based features alone. Overall, we propose a standard set of features useful for trajectory-based VTE classification in binary decision tasks, and support previous suggestions that VTEs are supported by a network including, but likely extending beyond, the hippocampus.
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.