Back

Valence-partitioned learning signals drive choice behavior and phenomenal subjective experience in humans

Sands, P.; Jiang, A.; Jones, R.; Trattner, J.; Kishida, K.

2023-03-18 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.03.17.533213 bioRxiv
Show abstract

How the human brain generates conscious phenomenal experience is a fundamental problem. In particular, it is unknown how variable and dynamic changes in subjective affect are driven by interactions with objective phenomena. We hypothesize a neurocomputational mechanism that generates valence-specific learning signals associated with what it is like to be rewarded or punished. Our hypothesized model maintains a partition between appetitive and aversive information while generating independent and parallel reward and punishment learning signals. This valence-partitioned reinforcement learning (VPRL) model and its associated learning signals are shown to predict dynamic changes in 1) human choice behavior, 2) phenomenal subjective experience, and 3) BOLD-imaging responses that implicate a network of regions that process appetitive and aversive information that converge on the ventral striatum and ventromedial prefrontal cortex during moments of introspection. Our results demonstrate the utility of valence-partitioned reinforcement learning as a neurocomputational basis for investigating mechanisms that may drive conscious experience. HighlightsO_LITD-Reinforcement Learning (RL) theory interprets punishments relative to rewards. C_LIO_LIEnvironmentally, appetitive and aversive events are statistically independent. C_LIO_LIValence-partitioned RL (VPRL) processes reward and punishment independently. C_LIO_LIWe show VPRL better accounts for human choice behavior and associated BOLD activity. C_LIO_LIVPRL signals predict dynamic changes in human subjective experience. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.