Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42459957›Full record

ArticleComputational brain & behavior2024

Exploration-Exploitation Mechanisms in Recurrent Neural Networks and Human Learners in Restless Bandit Problems.

D Tuzsus, A Brands, I Pappas, J Peters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

D TuzsusDepartment of Psychology, Biological Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
A BrandsDepartment of Psychology, Biological Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
I PappasDepartment of Neurology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA.
J PetersDepartment of Psychology, Biological Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A key feature of animal and human decision-making is to balance the exploration of unknown options for information gain (directed exploration) versus selecting known options for immediate reward (exploitation), which is often examined using restless bandit tasks. Recurrent neural network models (RNNs) have recently gained traction in both human and systems neuroscience work on reinforcement learning, due to their ability to show meta-learning of task domains. Here we comprehensively compared the performance of a range of RNN architectures as well as human learners on restless four-armed bandit problems. The best-performing architecture (LSTM network with computation noise) exhibited human-level performance. Computational modeling of behavior first revealed that both human and RNN behavioral data contain signatures of higher-order perseveration, i.e., perseveration beyond the last trial, but this effect was more pronounced in RNNs. In contrast, human learners, but not RNNs, exhibited a positive effect of uncertainty on choice probability (directed exploration). RNN hidden unit dynamics revealed that exploratory choices were associated with a disruption of choice predictive signals during states of low state value, resembling a win-stay-loose-shift strategy, and resonating with previous single unit recording findings in monkey prefrontal cortex. Our results highlight both similarities and differences between exploration behavior as it emerges in meta-learning RNNs, and computational mechanisms identified in cognitive and systems neuroscience work.

Indexed as

Computational modeling of behaviorExploration-exploitation trade-offMeta-reinforcement learningMulti-armed bandit taskRecurrent neural networks

Identifiers

PMID42459957
PMCPMC13298653

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.