Interpretable abstractions of artificial neural networks predict behavior and neural activity during human information gathering
D'Ambrogio, S.; Grohn, J.; Khalighinejad, N.; Mattar, M.; Hunt, L. T.; Rushworth, M. F.
Show abstract
It has been suggested that humans and other animals are driven by a fundamental desire to acquire information about opportunities available in their environments. Not only might such a desire explain pathological behaviors, but it may be needed to account for how everyday decisions are resolved. Here, we combine artificial neural networks (ANNs) with symbolic regression to extract an expressive yet interpretable model that specifies how human participants evaluate decision-relevant information during choice. This model accounts for behavior in our own data and in previous work, outperforming existing accounts of information sampling such as the Upper Confidence Bound heuristic. This modelling approach has broad potential for uncovering novel patterns in behavior and cognitive processes, while also specifying them in human-interpretable formats. We then used the value of information derived by our model, together with ultra-high field neuroimaging, to examine activity across a suite of subcortical neuromodulatory nuclei and two cortical regions that influence these nuclei. This established roles for midbrain dopaminergic nuclei, anterior cingulate cortex, and anterior insula in mediating the influence of value of information on behavior.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A circuit mechanism for irrationalities in decision-making and NMDA receptor hypofunction: behaviour, computational modelling, and pharmacology 96%
- Value construction through sequential sampling explains serial dependencies in decision making 96%
- Humans Use Forward Thinking to Exert Social Control 96%
"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.