Cargando…

Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task

There is no single way to represent a task. Indeed, despite experiencing the same task events and contingencies, different subjects may form distinct task representations. As experimenters, we often assume that subjects represent the task as we envision it. However, such a representation cannot be t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Song, Mingyu, Takahashi, Yuji K., Burton, Amanda C., Roesch, Matthew R., Schoenbaum, Geoffrey, Niv, Yael, Langdon, Angela J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8986096/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35333867
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009897
_version_ 1784682476941082624
author Song, Mingyu
Takahashi, Yuji K.
Burton, Amanda C.
Roesch, Matthew R.
Schoenbaum, Geoffrey
Niv, Yael
Langdon, Angela J.
author_facet Song, Mingyu
Takahashi, Yuji K.
Burton, Amanda C.
Roesch, Matthew R.
Schoenbaum, Geoffrey
Niv, Yael
Langdon, Angela J.
author_sort Song, Mingyu
collection PubMed
description There is no single way to represent a task. Indeed, despite experiencing the same task events and contingencies, different subjects may form distinct task representations. As experimenters, we often assume that subjects represent the task as we envision it. However, such a representation cannot be taken for granted, especially in animal experiments where we cannot deliver explicit instruction regarding the structure of the task. Here, we tested how rats represent an odor-guided choice task in which two odor cues indicated which of two responses would lead to reward, whereas a third odor indicated free choice among the two responses. A parsimonious task representation would allow animals to learn from the forced trials what is the better option to choose in the free-choice trials. However, animals may not necessarily generalize across odors in this way. We fit reinforcement-learning models that use different task representations to trial-by-trial choice behavior of individual rats performing this task, and quantified the degree to which each animal used the more parsimonious representation, generalizing across trial types. Model comparison revealed that most rats did not acquire this representation despite extensive experience. Our results demonstrate the importance of formally testing possible task representations that can afford the observed behavior, rather than assuming that animals’ task representations abide by the generative task structure that governs the experimental design.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8986096
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89860962022-04-07 Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task Song, Mingyu Takahashi, Yuji K. Burton, Amanda C. Roesch, Matthew R. Schoenbaum, Geoffrey Niv, Yael Langdon, Angela J. PLoS Comput Biol Research Article There is no single way to represent a task. Indeed, despite experiencing the same task events and contingencies, different subjects may form distinct task representations. As experimenters, we often assume that subjects represent the task as we envision it. However, such a representation cannot be taken for granted, especially in animal experiments where we cannot deliver explicit instruction regarding the structure of the task. Here, we tested how rats represent an odor-guided choice task in which two odor cues indicated which of two responses would lead to reward, whereas a third odor indicated free choice among the two responses. A parsimonious task representation would allow animals to learn from the forced trials what is the better option to choose in the free-choice trials. However, animals may not necessarily generalize across odors in this way. We fit reinforcement-learning models that use different task representations to trial-by-trial choice behavior of individual rats performing this task, and quantified the degree to which each animal used the more parsimonious representation, generalizing across trial types. Model comparison revealed that most rats did not acquire this representation despite extensive experience. Our results demonstrate the importance of formally testing possible task representations that can afford the observed behavior, rather than assuming that animals’ task representations abide by the generative task structure that governs the experimental design. Public Library of Science 2022-03-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8986096/ /pubmed/35333867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009897 Text en https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) public domain dedication.
spellingShingle Research Article
Song, Mingyu
Takahashi, Yuji K.
Burton, Amanda C.
Roesch, Matthew R.
Schoenbaum, Geoffrey
Niv, Yael
Langdon, Angela J.
Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
title Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
title_full Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
title_fullStr Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
title_full_unstemmed Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
title_short Minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
title_sort minimal cross-trial generalization in learning the representation of an odor-guided choice task
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8986096/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35333867
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009897
work_keys_str_mv AT songmingyu minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask
AT takahashiyujik minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask
AT burtonamandac minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask
AT roeschmatthewr minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask
AT schoenbaumgeoffrey minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask
AT nivyael minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask
AT langdonangelaj minimalcrosstrialgeneralizationinlearningtherepresentationofanodorguidedchoicetask