Comparison of multiple video tracking-based behavioral summary approaches for compound discrimination
Ritter, M.; Deiana, S.; Ritter, A.; Wotjak, C. T.; Brecht, M.; Bogadhi, A. R.
Show abstract
The rapidly increasing number of video tracking-based behavioral summary tools and methods raises the question as to the most suitable approaches for pharmacological fingerprinting in pre-clinical research. We have recently shown that social context has a strong effect on behavioral syntax in mice, further suggesting that treatment effects can be context dependent. Here, we aim to answer the question whether there is an optimal combination of context and behavioral summary method for effect detection and discrimination of different psychoactive substances in a controlled environment. To this end, we applied eight different treatment-dosage pairs (amphetamine 1.5,3,6 mg/kg; modafinil 5,10,50 mg/kg; seltorexant 3,10 mg/kg) and evaluated five different approaches to behavioral summary: parametric aggregation, unsupervised segmentation in Keypoint-MoSeq (KPMS) & Variational Animal Motion Encoding (VAME), and supervised segmentation in Simple Behavioral Analysis (SimBA) & A-SOiD, across two different contexts (Solitary & Social) in 314 recordings of freely moving mice in an open-field arena. Surprisingly, our results show no significant differences in performance across models and context. Across treatment effect detection to treatment-dose discrimination, all models showed performance significantly above chance that was insensitive to various data limitations and extensions. Overall, our study shows that under the tested conditions and treatments, the choice of a behavioral summary model does not meaningfully affect the description of treatment effects. Simple aggregate measures from tracking data and machine learning based behavioral summary approaches that are expensive, in terms of training data and computational resources, performed equally well. Our findings taken together with literature suggest that the fuller decomposition of complex behavior through unsupervised machine learning might be necessary for the description of large-scale datasets but does not necessarily align with the goals present in smaller-scale treatment discrimination tasks common in pre-clinical research.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- pyControl: Open source, Python based, hardware and software for controlling behavioural neuroscience experiments. 94%
- A circuit mechanism for irrationalities in decision-making and NMDA receptor hypofunction: behaviour, computational modelling, and pharmacology 93%
- Mesoscale cortex-wide neural dynamics predict goal-directed, but not random actions in mice several seconds prior to movement 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- LabGym: quantification of user-defined animal behaviors using learning-based holistic assessment 95%
- Social behavioral profiling by unsupervised deep learning reveals a stimulative effect of dopamine D3 agonists on zebrafish sociality 94%
- Enhanced perceptual task performance without deprivation in mice using medial forebrain bundle stimulation 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Reinforcement Learning Model with Choice Traces for a Progressive Ratio Schedule 93%
- Multi-domain touchscreen-based cognitive assessment of C57BL/6J female mice shows whole body exposure to 56Fe particle space radiation in maturity improves discrimination learning yet impairs stimulus-response habit learning 92%
- Day-to-day spontaneous social behaviours is quantitatively and qualitatively affected in a 16p11.2 deletion mouse model. 91%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- An inductive bias for slowly changing features in human reinforcement learning 92%
- Predictive reward-prediction errors of climbing fiber inputs integrate modular reinforcement learning with supervised learning 92%
- Predicting drug polypharmacology from cell morphology readouts using variational autoencoder latent space arithmetic 92%
"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.