ArticlePLoS computational biology2026
Deterministic dynamics of distributional multi-agent reinforcement learning.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how cognition shapes behavior across contexts remains a fundamental challenge for many disciplines. In particular, for the optimism heuristic-i.e., the tendency to overweight positive (relative to negative) information-knowledge remains fragmented, with models developed in specific domains in isolation. Here, we present a unifying computational framework by deriving the deterministic dynamics of distributional multi-agent reinforcement learning. Our approach discretizes return distributions through a finite set of neurons, consistent with recent empirical findings on distributional coding in the brain. We validate our framework by reproducing established results across three iconic domains spanning individual bandit choice under resource variability, social coordination, and risky choice. Beyond validation, we uncover novel interactions among optimism, return discretization, and temporal discounting. Specifically, we identify conditions under which return discretization generates choice hysteresis and, in extreme parameter regimes, inescapable perseveration. We further reveal "individual dilemmas": circumstances where agents gravitate toward suboptimal yet stable strategies, offering a mechanistic explanation for incoherent choice patterns. Our framework bridges neuroscience, psychology, and collective behavior, enabling empirically testable hypotheses about how cognitive biases propagate from individual cognition to social outcomes in complex environments.
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.