Dataset Information

Dopamine, reward learning, and active inference.

ABSTRACT: Temporal difference learning models propose phasic dopamine signaling encodes reward prediction errors that drive learning. This is supported by studies where optogenetic stimulation of dopamine neurons can stand in lieu of actual reward. Nevertheless, a large body of data also shows that dopamine is not necessary for learning, and that dopamine depletion primarily affects task performance. We offer a resolution to this paradox based on an hypothesis that dopamine encodes the precision of beliefs about alternative actions, and thus controls the outcome-sensitivity of behavior. We extend an active inference scheme for solving Markov decision processes to include learning, and show that simulated dopamine dynamics strongly resemble those actually observed during instrumental conditioning. Furthermore, simulated dopamine depletion impairs performance but spares learning, while simulated excitation of dopamine neurons drives reward learning, through aberrant inference about outcome states. Our formal approach provides a novel and parsimonious reconciliation of apparently divergent experimental findings.

SUBMITTER: FitzGerald TH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4631836 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dopamine, reward learning, and active inference.

FitzGerald Thomas H B TH Dolan Raymond J RJ Friston Karl K

Frontiers in computational neuroscience 20151104

Temporal difference learning models propose phasic dopamine signaling encodes reward prediction errors that drive learning. This is supported by studies where optogenetic stimulation of dopamine neurons can stand in lieu of actual reward. Nevertheless, a large body of data also shows that dopamine is not necessary for learning, and that dopamine depletion primarily affects task performance. We offer a resolution to this paradox based on an hypothesis that dopamine encodes the precision of belief ...[more]

PMID: 26581305

Similar Datasets

Project description:Converging theories suggest that organisms learn and exploit probabilistic models of their environment. However, it remains unclear how such models can be learned in practice. The open-ended complexity of natural environments means that it is generally infeasible for organisms to model their environment comprehensively. Alternatively, action-oriented models attempt to encode a parsimonious representation of adaptive agent-environment interactions. One approach to learning action-oriented models is to learn online in the presence of goal-directed behaviours. This constrains an agent to behaviourally relevant trajectories, reducing the diversity of the data a model need account for. Unfortunately, this approach can cause models to prematurely converge to sub-optimal solutions, through a process we refer to as a bad-bootstrap. Here, we exploit the normative framework of active inference to show that efficient action-oriented models can be learned by balancing goal-oriented and epistemic (information-seeking) behaviours in a principled manner. We illustrate our approach using a simple agent-based model of bacterial chemotaxis. We first demonstrate that learning via goal-directed behaviour indeed constrains models to behaviorally relevant aspects of the environment, but that this approach is prone to sub-optimal convergence. We then demonstrate that epistemic behaviours facilitate the construction of accurate and comprehensive models, but that these models are not tailored to any specific behavioural niche and are therefore less efficient in their use of data. Finally, we show that active inference agents learn models that are parsimonious, tailored to action, and which avoid bad bootstraps and sub-optimal convergence. Critically, our results indicate that models learned through active inference can support adaptive behaviour in spite of, and indeed because of, their departure from veridical representations of the environment. Our approach provides a principled method for learning adaptive models from limited interactions with an environment, highlighting a route to sample efficient learning algorithms.

Project description:In the DSM-5, psychiatric diagnoses are made based on self-reported symptoms and clinician-identified signs. Though helpful in choosing potential interventions based on the available regimens, this conceptualization of psychiatric diseases can limit basic science investigation into their underlying causes. The reward prediction error (RPE) hypothesis of dopamine neuron function posits that phasic dopamine signals encode the difference between the rewards a person expects and experiences. The computational framework from which this hypothesis was derived, temporal difference reinforcement learning (TDRL), is largely focused on reward processing rather than punishment learning. Many psychiatric disorders are characterized by aberrant behaviors, expectations, reward processing, and hypothesized dopaminergic signaling, but also characterized by suffering and the inability to change one's behavior despite negative consequences. In this review, we provide an overview of the RPE theory of phasic dopamine neuron activity and review the gains that have been made through the use of computational reinforcement learning theory as a framework for understanding changes in reward processing. The relative dearth of explicit accounts of punishment learning in computational reinforcement learning theory and its application in neuroscience is highlighted as a significant gap in current computational psychiatric research. Four disorders comprise the main focus of this review: two disorders of traditionally hypothesized hyperdopaminergic function, addiction and schizophrenia, followed by two disorders of traditionally hypothesized hypodopaminergic function, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Insights gained from a reward processing based reinforcement learning framework about underlying dopaminergic mechanisms and the role of punishment learning (when available) are explored in each disorder. Concluding remarks focus on the future directions required to characterize neuropsychiatric disorders with a hypothesized cause of underlying dopaminergic transmission.

Project description:Within computational neuroscience, the algorithmic and neural basis of structure learning remains poorly understood. Concept learning is one primary example, which requires both a type of internal model expansion process (adding novel hidden states that explain new observations), and a model reduction process (merging different states into one underlying cause and thus reducing model complexity via meta-learning). Although various algorithmic models of concept learning have been proposed within machine learning and cognitive science, many are limited to various degrees by an inability to generalize, the need for very large amounts of training data, and/or insufficiently established biological plausibility. Using concept learning as an example case, we introduce a novel approach for modeling structure learning-and specifically state-space expansion and reduction-within the active inference framework and its accompanying neural process theory. Our aim is to demonstrate its potential to facilitate a novel line of active inference research in this area. The approach we lay out is based on the idea that a generative model can be equipped with extra (hidden state or cause) "slots" that can be engaged when an agent learns about novel concepts. This can be combined with a Bayesian model reduction process, in which any concept learning-associated with these slots-can be reset in favor of a simpler model with higher model evidence. We use simulations to illustrate this model's ability to add new concepts to its state space (with relatively few observations) and increase the granularity of the concepts it currently possesses. We also simulate the predicted neural basis of these processes. We further show that it can accomplish a simple form of "one-shot" generalization to new stimuli. Although deliberately simple, these simulation results highlight ways in which active inference could offer useful resources in developing neurocomputational models of structure learning. They provide a template for how future active inference research could apply this approach to real-world structure learning problems and assess the added utility it may offer.

Dataset Information

Dopamine, reward learning, and active inference.

Publications

Dopamine, reward learning, and active inference.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets