Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38748770›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2024

Artificial neural networks for model identification and parameter estimation in computational cognitive models.

Milena Rmus, Ti-Fen Pan, Liyu Xia, Anne G E Collins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. phyddle: software for exploring phylogenetic models with deep learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  10. Flexible inference for animal learning rules using neural networks.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Bridging theory and data: A computational workflow for cultural evolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Milena RmusDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2044-048X
Ti-Fen PanDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.
Liyu XiaDepartment of Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.
Anne G E CollinsDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.

Funding

The neural computations supporting hierarchical reinforcement learningR01MH119383 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI COLLINS, ANNE G.E. · 2019 to 2023
$1.9M
Developing artificial neural network tools for cognitive modelingR21MH132974 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI COLLINS, ANNE G.E. · 2023 to 2024
$416k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH119383NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH132974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational cognitive models have been used extensively to formalize cognitive processes. Model parameters offer a simple way to quantify individual differences in how humans process information. Similarly, model comparison allows researchers to identify which theories, embedded in different models, provide the best accounts of the data. Cognitive modeling uses statistical tools to quantitatively relate models to data that often rely on computing/estimating the likelihood of the data under the model. However, this likelihood is computationally intractable for a substantial number of models. These relevant models may embody reasonable theories of cognition, but are often under-explored due to the limited range of tools available to relate them to data. We contribute to filling this gap in a simple way using artificial neural networks (ANNs) to map data directly onto model identity and parameters, bypassing the likelihood estimation. We test our instantiation of an ANN as a cognitive model fitting tool on classes of cognitive models with strong inter-trial dependencies (such as reinforcement learning models), which offer unique challenges to most methods. We show that we can adequately perform both parameter estimation and model identification using our ANN approach, including for models that cannot be fit using traditional likelihood-based methods. We further discuss our work in the context of the ongoing research leveraging simulation-based approaches to parameter estimation and model identification, and how these approaches broaden the class of cognitive models researchers can quantitatively investigate.

Indexed as

CognitionComputational BiologyComputer SimulationNeural Networks, ComputerAlgorithmsHumansLikelihood FunctionsModels, Neurological

Identifiers

PMID38748770
PMCPMC11132492

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.