Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40588765›Full record

ArticleJournal of the experimental analysis of behavior2025

Machine learning to detect schedules using spatiotemporal data of behavior: A proof of concept.

Marc J Lanovaz, Varsovia Hernandez, Alejandro León

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marc J LanovazÉcole de psychoéducation, Université de Montréal, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9023-0314
Varsovia HernandezCentro de Investigaciones Biomédicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Mexico.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6849-8461
Alejandro LeónCentro de Investigaciones Biomédicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Mexico.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7386-9784

Funding

Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé 269462
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, the experimental analysis of behavior has relied on the single discrete response paradigm (e.g., key pecks, lever presses, screen clicks) to identify behavioral patterns. However, the development and availability of new technology allow researchers to move beyond this paradigm and use other features to detect schedules. Thus, our study used spatiotemporal data to compare the accuracy of four machine learning algorithms (i.e., logistic regression, support vector classifiers, random forests, and artificial neural networks) in detecting the presence and the components of time-based schedules in 12 rats involved in a behavioral experiment. Using spatiotemporal data, the algorithms accurately identified the presence or absence of programmed schedules and correctly differentiated between fixed- and variable-space schedules. That said, our analyses failed to identify an algorithm to discriminate fixed-time from variable-time schedules. Furthermore, none of the algorithms performed systematically better than the others. Our findings provide preliminary support for the utility of using spatiotemporal data with machine learning to detect stimulus schedules.

Indexed as

Machine LearningReinforcement ScheduleAlgorithmsAnimalsConditioning, OperantMaleNeural Networks, ComputerProof of Concept StudyRatsRats, Long-EvansSpatio-Temporal AnalysisSupport Vector Machinemachine learningneural networkspatiotemporal datatime‐based schedule

Identifiers

PMID40588765
PMCPMC12209495

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.