 |
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
The Journal of Neuroscience, January 14, 2004, 24(2):447-461; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2908-03.2004
Previous Article | Next Article
Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
Dynamic Analysis of Learning in Behavioral Experiments
Anne C. Smith,1,2 Loren M. Frank,1,2 Sylvia Wirth,3 Marianna Yanike,3 Dan Hu,4 Yasuo Kubota,4 Ann M. Graybiel,4 Wendy A. Suzuki,3 andEmery N. Brown1,2 1Neuroscience Statistics Research Laboratory, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, 2Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Harvard Medical School-Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, 3Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, New York 10003, and 4Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
Understanding how an animal's ability to learn relates to neural activity or is altered by lesions, different attentional states, pharmacological interventions, or genetic manipulations are central questions in neuroscience. Although learning is a dynamic process, current analyses do not use dynamic estimation methods, require many trials across many animals to establish the occurrence of learning, and provide no consensus as how best to identify when learning has occurred. We develop a state-space model paradigm to characterize learning as the probability of a correct response as a function of trial number (learning curve). We compute the learning curve and its confidence intervals using a state-space smoothing algorithm and define the learning trial as the first trial on which there is reasonable certainty (>0.95) that a subject performs better than chance for the balance of the experiment. For a range of simulated learning experiments, the smoothing algorithm estimated learning curves with smaller mean integrated squared error and identified the learning trials with greater reliability than commonly used methods. The smoothing algorithm tracked easily the rapid learning of a monkey during a single session of an association learning experiment and identified learning 2 to 4 d earlier than accepted criteria for a rat in a 47 d procedural learning experiment. Our state-space paradigm estimates learning curves for single animals, gives a precise definition of learning, and suggests a coherent statistical framework for the design and analysis of learning experiments that could reduce the number of animals and trials per animal that these studies require.
Key words: learning; behavior; state-space model; hidden Markov model; change-point test; association task; EM algorithm
Received June 11, 2003; revised October 8, 2003; accepted October 20, 2003.
This article has been cited by other articles:
M. J. Prerau, A. C. Smith, U. T. Eden, Y. Kubota, M. Yanike, W. Suzuki, A. M. Graybiel, and E. N. Brown
Characterizing Learning by Simultaneous Analysis of Continuous and Binary Measures of Performance
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2009; 102(5): 3060 - 3072.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
T. C. Ings and L. Chittka
Predator crypsis enhances behaviourally mediated indirect effects on plants by altering bumblebee foraging preferences
Proc R Soc B, June 7, 2009; 276(1664): 2031 - 2036.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
E. L. Rich and M. Shapiro
Rat Prefrontal Cortical Neurons Selectively Code Strategy Switches
J. Neurosci., June 3, 2009; 29(22): 7208 - 7219.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
M. P. Karlsson and L. M. Frank
Network Dynamics Underlying the Formation of Sparse, Informative Representations in the Hippocampus
J. Neurosci., December 24, 2008; 28(52): 14271 - 14281.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
A. Brovelli, N. Laksiri, B. Nazarian, M. Meunier, and D. Boussaoud
Understanding the Neural Computations of Arbitrary Visuomotor Learning through fMRI and Associative Learning Theory
Cereb Cortex, July 1, 2008; 18(7): 1485 - 1495.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
G. Czanner, U. T. Eden, S. Wirth, M. Yanike, W. A. Suzuki, and E. N. Brown
Analysis of Between-Trial and Within-Trial Neural Spiking Dynamics
J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2008; 99(5): 2672 - 2693.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
R. Srimal, J. Diedrichsen, E. B. Ryklin, and C. E. Curtis
Obligatory Adaptation of Saccade Gains
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2008; 99(3): 1554 - 1558.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
A. C. Smith, S. Wirth, W. A. Suzuki, and E. N. Brown
Bayesian Analysis of Interleaved Learning and Response Bias in Behavioral Experiments
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2007; 97(3): 2516 - 2524.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Y. Asaka, K. N. Mauldin, A. L. Griffin, M. A. Seager, E. Shurell, and S. D. Berry
Nonpharmacological amelioration of age-related learning deficits: The impact of hippocampal {theta}-triggered training
PNAS, September 13, 2005; 102(37): 13284 - 13288.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
J. R. Law, M. A. Flanery, S. Wirth, M. Yanike, A. C. Smith, L. M. Frank, W. A. Suzuki, E. N. Brown, and C. E. L. Stark
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Activity during the Gradual Acquisition and Expression of Paired-Associate Memory
J. Neurosci., June 15, 2005; 25(24): 5720 - 5729.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
W. A. Suzuki and E. N. Brown
Behavioral and Neurophysiological Analyses of Dynamic Learning Processes
Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev, June 1, 2005; 4(2): 67 - 95.
[Abstract] [PDF]
T. Wolbers and C. Buchel
Dissociable Retrosplenial and Hippocampal Contributions to Successful Formation of Survey Representations
J. Neurosci., March 30, 2005; 25(13): 3333 - 3340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
A. C. Smith, M. R. Stefani, B. Moghaddam, and E. N. Brown
Analysis and Design of Behavioral Experiments to Characterize Population Learning
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2005; 93(3): 1776 - 1792.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|