ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Predictive reward-prediction errors of climbing fiber inputs integrate modular reinforcement learning with supervised learning.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consensus Paper: Models of Cerebellar Functions.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Review
- A theory of cerebellar learning as spike-based reinforcement learning in continuous time and space.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- A cerebello-thalamo-cortical pathway transmits reward-based post-error signals for motor timing correction during learning in male mice.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Roles and interplay of reinforcement-based and error-based processes during reaching and gait in neurotypical adults and individuals with Parkinson's disease.PLoS computational biology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although the cerebellum is typically associated with supervised learning algorithms, it also exhibits extensive involvement in reward processing. In this study, we investigated the cerebellum's role in executing reinforcement learning algorithms, with a particular emphasis on essential reward-prediction errors. We employed the Q-learning model to accurately reproduce the licking responses of mice in a Go/No-go auditory-discrimination task. This method enabled the calculation of reinforcement learning variables, such as reward, predicted reward, and reward-prediction errors in each learning trial. Through tensor component analysis of two-photon Ca2+ imaging data from more than 6,000 Purkinje cells, we found that climbing fiber inputs of the two distinct components, which were specifically activated during Go and No-go cues in the learning process, showed an inverse relationship with predictive reward-prediction errors. Assuming bidirectional parallel-fiber Purkinje-cell synaptic plasticity, we constructed a cerebellar neural-network model with 5,000 spiking neurons of granule cells, Purkinje cells, cerebellar nuclei neurons, and inferior olive neurons. The network model qualitatively reproduced distinct changes in licking behaviors, climbing-fiber firing rates, and their synchronization during discrimination learning separately for Go/No-go conditions. We found that Purkinje cells in the two components could develop specific motor commands for their respective auditory cues, guided by the predictive reward-prediction errors from their climbing fiber inputs. These results indicate a possible role of context-specific actors in modular reinforcement learning, integrating with cerebellar supervised learning capabilities.
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.