Back

Closed-loop sensory feedback enables fast and reliable instrumental acquisition in head-fixed mice

Ranganath, A.; Hähnke, D.; Jacob, S. N.

2026-07-29 animal behavior and cognition
10.64898/2026.07.26.740810 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Instrumental learning typically requires hundreds to thousands of trials in which subjects learn to link motor responses to sensory cues. In standard rodent protocols, response accuracy is reported only at trial end, preventing subjects from correcting erroneously initiated responses. We hypothesized that within-trial, closed-loop sensory feedback would accelerate instrumental learning by providing real-time information about response correctness. Head-fixed mice performed a two-alternative forced-choice task by rotating a choice wheel in response to sensory cues. Mice received either no feedback (n = 18), auditory feedback (n = 16), or audiovisual feedback (n = 4) coupled to wheel movements. Feedback-receiving mice required significantly fewer trials to reach 70 % accuracy criterion (median: 3186, 4918 and 7329 trials for multimodal, unimodal and no feedback, respectively; p = 0.0245) and showed higher accuracy when modifying choices (expert stage: 17 %, 11 % and 9 % accuracy in trials with modified choices for multimodal, unimodal and no feedback, respectively; p=1.04x10-). Only feedback mice displayed movement refinements across training (p = 8.02x10-, p = 4.07x10-{superscript 1} and p = 0.2602 for multimodal, unimodal and no feedback, respectively). In summary, closed-loop sensory feedback accelerated instrumental acquisition, demonstrating its value as routine training protocol. HIGHLIGHTSO_LIMice provided with feedback require fewer trials to reach expert stage in an instrumental learning task C_LIO_LIMice provided with feedback perform with higher accuracy in trials involving changes of mind C_LIO_LIMovement trajectories of mice provided with feedback undergo refinement as training advances C_LIO_LISensory feedback can be used as a training aid to accelerate instrumental learning C_LI

Matching journals

The top 3 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.