ArticleScience advances2024
A vast space of compact strategies for effective decisions.
Article in Science advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Foraging as an ethological framework for neuroscience.Trends in neurosciences · 2025Review
- Inferring learning rules during de novo task learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Optimization and variability can coexist.ArXiv · 2025Article
- Review
- Flexible inference for animal learning rules using neural networks.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inference-based decision-making, which underlies a broad range of behavioral tasks, is typically studied using a small number of handcrafted models. We instead enumerate a complete ensemble of strategies that could be used to effectively, but not necessarily optimally, solve a dynamic foraging task. Each strategy is expressed as a behavioral "program" that uses a limited number of internal states to specify actions conditioned on past observations. We show that the ensemble of strategies is enormous-comprising a quarter million programs with up to five internal states-but can nevertheless be understood in terms of algorithmic "mutations" that alter the structure of individual programs. We devise embedding algorithms that reveal how mutations away from a Bayesian-like strategy can diversify behavior while preserving performance, and we construct a compositional description to link low-dimensional changes in algorithmic structure with high-dimensional changes in behavior. Together, this work provides an alternative approach for understanding individual variability in behavior across animals and tasks.
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.