Cited by 472Motor Control and AdaptationMemory and Neural MechanismsTactile and Sensory Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 95 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 63 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Rethinking Motor Learning and Savings in Adaptation Paradigms: Model-Free Memory for Successful Actions Combines with Internal Models

Open access

Huang, Vincent S., Haith, Adrian, Mazzoni, Pietro, Krakauer, John W.·2011·Neuron

DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.04.012PMC PMC3134523

Open this paper in CoChat — free account Open PDF

Abstract

Although motor learning is likely to involve multiple processes, phenomena observed in error-based motor learning paradigms tend to be conceptualized in terms of only a single process – adaptation, which occurs through updating an internal model. Here we argue that fundamental phenomena like movement direction biases, savings (faster relearning) and interference do not relate to adaptation but instead are attributable to two additional learning processes that can be characterized as model-free: use-dependent plasticity and operant reinforcement. Although usually “hidden” behind adaptation, we demonstrate, with modified visuomotor rotation paradigms, that these distinct model-based and model-free processes combine to learn an error-based motor task: (1) Adaptation of an internal model channels movements toward successful error reduction in visual space. (2) Repetition of the newly adapted movement induces directional biases towards the repeated movement. (3) Operant reinforcement through association of the adapted movement with successful error reduction is responsible for savings.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper argues that error-based motor adaptation paradigms conflate three learning processes: model-based adaptation, use-dependent plasticity, and operant reinforcement. Across modified visuomotor rotation experiments, savings depended on prior association of a successful hand-space movement with adaptation, not on adaptation alone.

Key findings

Adaptation with movement repetition (Adp+Rep+) induced a directional bias toward the repeated 70° hand-space direction: hand-movement distributions were tighter than adaptation-only (mean SD 4.9±0.4° vs 11.7±0.45°, t(14)=-11.95, p<0.001), with bias slopes of 0.32±0.03 for trained targets and 0.42±0.04 for probe targets.
Savings occurred only when adaptation was paired with repetition: Adp+Rep+ relearned faster (0.49±0.08 trial⁻¹) than naïve controls (0.13±0.02 trial⁻¹; t(14)=3.495, p=0.004), whereas adaptation-only (Adp+Rep−, 0.12±0.02 trial⁻¹) and repetition-only (Adp−Rep+) showed no savings. Adp+Rep+ also showed a 35% increase in average error reduced over the first 20 trials versus naïve (p=0.001).
Savings transferred to an oppositely signed rotation when the required hand-space solution was the same: SAME-SOLNhand relearned faster (0.23±0.03 trial⁻¹) than initial learning (0.11±0.04 trial⁻¹; p=0.03), while SAME-SOLNvisual showed no savings (0.11±0.02 trial⁻¹; p=0.411).
A state-space model fit adaptation-only data well (r²=0.968) but failed for Adp+Rep+ at asymptote (r²=-0.502), supporting an additional model-free process.

Methods

Sixty healthy, right-handed subjects (mean age 24.7±4.9, 25 males) performed a visuomotor rotation reaching task with a mirror/air-jet apparatus; subjects were randomly assigned to groups across three experiments.
Experiment 1 compared Adp+Rep+ and Adp+Rep− (n=8 each). Experiment 2 compared four groups: Adp+Rep+, Adp+Rep−, Adp−Rep+, Adp−Rep− (n=10, 10, 6, 6). Experiment 3 compared SAME-SOLNhand and SAME-SOLNvisual (n=6 each).
Learning and relearning rates were estimated by fitting a single decaying exponential to error time series; trial-to-trial hand directions were simulated with a single-state state-space model; group comparisons used t-tests and repeated-measures ANOVA, with power analysis indicating a minimum of 6 subjects per group.

Limitations

Stated in the paper: Experiment 2 had two potential concerns—Adp+Rep+ and Adp+Rep− may have differed slightly in initial adaptation to the 95° target (~6°), and Adp+Rep− trained on 20° but was tested on 25°; the authors addressed these with additional +20° rotation groups at the 90° target, which showed comparable initial adaptation and still greater savings for Adp+Rep+.
Stated in the paper: power analysis assumed an effect size from prior savings data and yielded a minimum of 6 subjects per group, so the negative results were argued to be likely true negatives.
Evident from the text: group sizes were small (n=6–10), all data came from one laboratory and one reaching paradigm, and the model-free processes were inferred behaviorally rather than formally modeled or neurally dissociated.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.04.012

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 63 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The state-space model was an excellent predictor of the empirical data for Adp+Rep− (r2=0.968, Fig. 2C), which supports our assumption that asymptotic performance in Adp+Rep− can be completely accounted for by error-based learning of an internal model alone; subjects rotated”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Results > Experiment 1: Movement repetition caused by adaptation induced large directional biases
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- The authors state this as an assumption: Asymptotic performance in Adp+Rep− can be completely accounted for by error-based learning of an internal model alone.

Show all 61 claims

It may state two separate claims as one. 38
Probably not a substantial claim. 20

The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neither repetition alone nor adaptation alone led to savings, which suggests that it is the association of the two that is critical.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have shown that use-dependent plasticity and operant reinforcement both occur along with adaptation.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Conclusions
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Despite its apparent simplicity, the SSM framework fits trial-to-trial perturbation data extremely well (Ethier et al., 2008; Huang and Shadmehr, 2007; Scheidt et al., 2001; Smith et al., 2006; Tanaka et al., 2009).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ethier et al., 2008 source
- Not checked yetcites Huang and Shadmehr, 2007
- Not checked yetcites Scheidt et al., 2001 source
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In particular, relearning of a given perturbation for a second time is faster than initial learning – a phenomenon known as savings (Ebbinghaus, 1913; Kojima et al., 2004; Krakauer et al., 2005; Smith et al., 2006; Zarahn et al., 2008) – whereas a basic single-timescale SSM predicts that learning should always occur at the same rate, regardless of past experience (Zarahn et al., 2008).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zarahn et al., 2008 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although SSM variants that include multiple timescales of learning (Kording et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2006) are able to explain savings over short timescales, this approach fails to predict the fact that savings still occurs following a prolonged period of washout of initial learning (Krakauer et al., 2005; Zarahn et al., 2008).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kording et al., 2007 source
- Not checked yetcites Smith et al., 2006 source
- Not checked yetcites Krakauer et al., 2005 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“More recently it has been shown that biases can be observed in parallel with acquisition of an internal model along the task-irrelevant dimension in a redundant task (Diedrichsen et al., 2010).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Diedrichsen et al., 2010 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, additional learning mechanisms must be present which are model-free in the sense that they are associated with a memory for action independently of an internal model and are likely to be driven directly by task success (i.e. reward).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclear
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Any task implicitly carries some notion of success or failure that can be encapsulated mathematically through a cost (reward) function.
In the paper
“In the theory of reinforcement learning, the general problem to be solved is to use experience to identify a suitable control policy in an unknown or changing environment (Sutton and Barto, 1998).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sutton and Barto, 1998
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Savings is a form of procedural and motor memory that manifests as faster relearning compared with initial learning (Ebbinghaus, 1913; Smith et al., 2006; Zarahn et al., 2008).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Savings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ebbinghaus, 1913
- Not checked yetcites Smith et al., 2006 source
- Not checked yetcites Zarahn et al., 2008 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adaptation is the model-based component, while model-free components include use-dependent plasticity and operant reinforcement.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is exactly what has been found: patients with PD were able to adapt to initial rotation as well as control subjects but they did not show savings (Bedard and Sanes, 2011; Marinelli et al., 2009).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Savings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bedard and Sanes, 2011
- Not checked yetcites Marinelli et al., 2009 source
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the contrary, we believe that adaptation is indifferent to reward outcomes on individual trials, and is purely sensitive to errors in the predicted state of the hand or cursor.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclear
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It appears, therefore, that adaptation is “automatic” – it is an obligate, perhaps reward-indifferent (Mazzoni and Krakauer, 2006), cerebellar-based (Martin et al., 1996a, b; Smith and Shadmehr, 2005; Tseng et al., 2007) learning process that will attempt to”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mazzoni and Krakauer, 2006 source
- Not checked yetcites Martin et al., 1996a, b
- Not checked yetcites Smith and Shadmehr, 2005 source
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Theoretical treatments have argued that competition between these two mechanisms enables the benefits of each to be combined to maximum effect (Daw et al., 2005).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Daw et al., 2005 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we are right in our assertion that motor learning studied with error-based paradigms results from the combination of model-free and model-based learning processes then these paradigms may be well suited to study how the brain modularly assembles complex motor abilities.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Conclusions
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In continuous and high-dimensional action spaces, pure model-free learning is unfeasible, especially if a detailed feedback control policy must be acquired.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: fails
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Any task implicitly carries some notion of success or failure that can be encapsulated mathematically through a cost (reward) function.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The presence of dopamine receptors on cells in primary motor cortex (Huntley et al., 1992; Luft and Schwarz, 2009; Ziemann et al., 1997) could provide a candidate mechanism for reward-based modulation of such use-dependent plasticity (Hosp et al., 2011).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Huntley et al., 1992 source
- Not checked yetcites Luft and Schwarz, 2009
- Not checked yetcites Ziemann et al., 1997 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“There is a precedent for such unconscious reward-based learning in the perceptual learning literature, and the reward can be internal – it does not need to be explicitly provided by the experimenter (Seitz et al., 2009).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Seitz et al., 2009 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Finally, operant reinforcement may require dopaminergic projections to the striatum (Wachter et al., 2010).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Wachter et al., 2010 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The workspace was calibrated so that the image of the cursor indicating hand position fell exactly on the unseen tip of the middle finger's location (i.e., veridical display) (Mazzoni et al., 2007).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Experimental Procedures > The set-up
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mazzoni et al., 2007 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This idea of the value of “near-misses” has been argued for in reinforcement algorithms that assign value to near-misses even when actual reinforcement is not given on such trials (MacLin et al., 2007).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites MacLin et al., 2007 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A recent motor learning model has been conceptualized in terms of the existence of fast and slow error-based processes (Kording et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2006).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kording et al., 2007 source
- Not checked yetcites Smith et al., 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The existence of separate learning processes may indicate an underlying anatomical separation.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Conclusions
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
In the paper
“For an independent samples t-test using a two-tailed alpha of 0.05 and power of 0.8, and assuming an effect size d = 1.9375 (computed based on previously reported group means and standard deviation; time constant = 0.47 for savings and 0.16 for naïve, with s.d. = 0.16), the minimum sample size is 6 subjects per group.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Experimental Procedures > Power analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zarahn et al., 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 6
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Based on our results, we argue that heretofore unexplained, or perhaps erroneously explained, phenomena in adaptation experiments result from the fact that most such experiments inadvertently lie somewhere between our adaptation-only protocol and our adaptation-plus-repetition protocol, with the result that three distinct forms of learning – adaptation, use-dependent plasticity, and operant”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Conclusions
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Re-experiencing the same task with the same or even opposite rotational perturbations induces the learner to initially reduce error through pure adaptation but when their movements come within range of the attractor, savings occurs.”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The rewarding/motivating nature of “near misses” has been reported for gambling where they increase the desire to play (Clark et al., 2009; Daw et al., 2006; Kakade and Dayan, 2002).”
§ Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models > Discussion > Adaptation as model-based learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Clark et al., 2009 source
- Not checked yetcites Daw et al., 2006 source
- Not checked yetcites Kakade and Dayan, 2002
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

57 of 57

The authors state this as an assumption.
Asymptotic performance in Adp+Rep− can be completely accounted for by error-based learning of an internal model alone.
“which supports our assumption that asymptotic performance in Adp+Rep− can be completely accounted for by error-based learning of an internal model alone”
The paper relies on this without support.
The cerebellum is unaffected in Parkinson's disease.
“a structure unaffected in Parkinson's disease (PD)”
The paper relies on this without support.
Reinforcement is rotation angle invariant; the adaptation-guided direction in hand space is what matters.
“because reinforcement should be rotation angle invariant as it is the adaptation-guided direction in hand space that matters”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most behavior in error-based motor learning paradigms is well described by adaptation.
“In spite of the fact that most behavior in error-based motor learning paradigms is well described by adaptation, we argue here that there are phenomena in perturbation paradigms that cannot be explained in terms of adaptation alone.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Any task implicitly carries some notion of success or failure that can be encapsulated mathematically through a cost (reward) function.
“All motor learning can be conceptualized within this framework; even if there is no explicit reward structure, any task implicitly carries some notion of success or failure that can be encapsulated mathematically through a cost (reward) function.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
In motor control, the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.
“In the case of motor control, however, we assume that the reward structure is unambiguous: success is achieved by the cursor reaching the target.”

6 of 6

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

Consistentt(14) = -11.95reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(14)=-11.95, p < .001”
Consistentt(18) = -0.34reported p = .738 · recomputed p = .738
“t(18)=-0.340, p = .738”
Consistentt(14) = 3.495reported p = .004 · recomputed p = .004
“t(14)=3.495, p = .004”
Consistentt(14) = -0.39reported p = .7 · recomputed p = .702
“t(14)=-0.39, p = .70”
Consistentt(18) = 4.62reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(18)=4.62, p < .001”
Consistentt(14) = -4.175reported p = .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(14)=-4.175, p = .001”
Consistentt(14) = -1.047reported p = .31 · recomputed p = .313
“t(14)=-1.047, p = .31”
Consistentt(14) = 3.06reported p = .009 · recomputed p = .008
“t(14)=3.06, p = .009”
Consistentt(10) = 0.594reported p = .565 · recomputed p = .566
“t(10)=0.594, p = .565”
Consistentt(5) = -2.371reported p = .03 · recomputed p = .064
“t(5)=-2.371, p = .03”
The paper states a one-tailed test
Consistentt(5) = 0.238reported p = .411 · recomputed p = .821
“t(5)=0.238, p = .411”
The paper states a one-tailed test
Consistentt(5) = 7.56reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(5)=7.56, p < .001”
Consistentt(5) = -0.2reported p = .849 · recomputed p = .849
“t(5)=-0.2, p = .849”

13 of 13

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

Learning rate is defined both as a time constant and its inverse
Minor
The Results say the reported error-reduction rate is the inverse of the time constant. Data Analysis instead defines that rate as the time constant itself, although its exponential formula uses it as an inverse time constant.
Block 4 is assigned both washout and test trials
Minor
The Experiment 3 procedure assigns Block 4 to two different sets of 80 trials. The test trials would have to be in another block to match the stated five-block protocol.

2 of 2

Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction
Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.2004.842673 · Cited by 25,268
Reinforcement Learning: A Survey
Kaelbling, L. P., Littman, M. L., & Moore, A. W. (1996) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.301 · Cited by 8,972
Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology
Ebbinghaus, H. (2013) · Annals of Neurosciences · doi:10.5214/ans.0972.7531.200408 · Cited by 2,827
Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task
Shadmehr, R., & Mussa-Ivaldi, F. (1994) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.14-05-03208.1994 · Cited by 2,612
Uncertainty-based competition between prefrontal and dorsolateral striatal systems for behavioral control
Daw, N. D., Niv, Y., & Dayan, P. (2005) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1560 · Cited by 2,533
Cortical substrates for exploratory decisions in humans
Daw, N. D., O'Doherty, J. P., Dayan, P., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R. J. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04766 · Cited by 2,224
By Carrot or by Stick: Cognitive Reinforcement Learning in Parkinsonism
Frank, M. J., Seeberger, L. C., & O'Reilly, R. C. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1102941 · Cited by 1,964
Error Correction, Sensory Prediction, and Adaptation in Motor Control
Shadmehr, R., Smith, M. A., & Krakauer, J. W. (2010) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-060909-153135 · Cited by 1,869
Self-citation
The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1152408 · Cited by 1,791 · cited 1×
“Indeed there are data from other areas of cognitive neuroscience that demonstrate that repeating something that you have successfully learned is the best way to remember it (Chiviacowsky and Wulf, 2007; Karpicke and Roediger, 2008; Wulf and Shea, 2002).”
Model-based influences on humans’ choices and striatal prediction errors
Daw, N. D., Gershman, S. J., Seymour, B., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.027 · Cited by 1,779

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 95 references

2 of the 95 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Sorted by citations

Items 401–470 of 470

Dissecting Motor Adaptation in Visually Guided Reaching Movements
Wu, H. G. (2012) · Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University)
Multi-rate State-dependent Primitives Underlie The Motor Adaptation and Unlearning to Motion-Depedent Force Perturbations
Asl, E. H. (2015) · doi:10.13021/mars/5027
M ECHANISMS OF MOTOR LEARNING AND BRAIN PLASTICITY POST
Troke, S., & Helm, E. E. (2015)
Optimizing motor memory in healthy adults
Hussain, S. J., Cole, K. J., Darling, W. G., Hazeltine, E., Voss, M., & Frey‐Law, L. (2016) · doi:10.17077/etd.2btexlsz
Examining the effects of reward and punishment on incidental learning
Freedberg, M., Hazeltine, E., Duff, M., McMurray, B., Voss, M., & Darling, W. (2016) · doi:10.17077/etd.b4zjzeio
Dexterous Manipulation: Sensorimotor Learning and Control
Fu, Q. (2013)
A Unified Model of Motor Learning
Takiyama, K. (2016) · The Brain & Neural Networks · doi:10.3902/jnns.23.14
Does incremental training improve motor learning
Chin, A. (2013) · Scholarship@Western (Western University)
About sensorimotor learning and the relevance of workspace perception
Wang, L., & Müsseler, J. (2013) · RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen)
Impact of prior errors on visuomotor adaptation and savings: experimental considerations and clinical implications
Wright, M. (2017) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.00012.2017
Neuromodulation with transcranial direct current stimulation : the influence of electrode arrangement
Fleming, M. K. (2017)
A State Space Model of a Visuomotor Rotation ExperimentPreprint
Broucke, M. E. (2017) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/197483
Visual and auditory information shed light on savings mechanismsPreprint
White, O., Barbiero, M., Maréchal, Q., & de Xivry, J. O. (2019) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/569186
Differentiating the roles of the cerebellum and motor cortices during visuomotor adaptation using either hand or whole arm reaching movements
Weightman, M. (2019) · University of Birmingham Institutional Research Archive (University of Birmingham)
Beep, Aim, Repeat: Influence of Use-dependent and Advance Preparation Processes during Sequential Movements
Patel, S. A. (2019) · TSpace (University of Toronto)
Stepping in circles: how locomotor signals of rotation adapt over time
George, R. J. S., Day, B. L., Butler, A. A., & Fitzpatrick, R. C. (2020) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jp279171
Reward and punishment: the neural correlates of reinforcement feedback during motor learning
Hill, C. M. (2019)
Understanding the Algorithms Underlying Human Motor Adaptation and Motor Reinforcement Learning
Miyamoto, Y. R. (2017) · Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University)
Memory of split-belt walking endures weeks in young children and younger adults but less so in older adultsPreprint
Lissinna, B., Smith, A., La, K., & Yang, J. F. (2021) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2021.02.12.430812
Experience of After-Effect of Memory Update Reduces Sensitivity to Errors During Sensory-Motor Adaptation Task
Tanamachi, K., Izawa, J., Yamamoto, S., Ishii, D., Yozu, A., & Kohno, Y. (2021) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.602405
When motor control hangs in the balance: Sensorimotor learning during balance-challenging conditions
Bakkum, A. (2021) · Summit (Simon Fraser University)
Music-induced mood improves retention in visuomotor adaptation
Waclawik, K. (2014) · Scholarship@Western (Western University)
The role of cerebellum in action acquisition and motor learning
Dagioglou, M. (2014) · University of Birmingham Institutional Research Archive (University of Birmingham)
Influence of Visual Clue in the Motor Adaptation Process
Costa, V. T., Oliveira, S. R. J., & Soares, A. B. (2022) · World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, September 7 - 12, 2009, Munich, Germany · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-70601-2_215
The Effect of High Fraction of Inspired Oxygen on Human Motor Learning Processes
Wang, Z. (2023) · Louisiana State University · doi:10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.6070
Effects of Different Feedback Conditions on Sensorimotor Adaptation Revealed in a Mirror Reversal Paradigm
Xu, J., Yang, C., Liufu, M., Chang, S., Chen, J., Lu, F., Hadjiosif, A. M., Haith, A. M., & Deng, X. (2023) · Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science · doi:10.4236/jbbs.2023.137009
Self-citation
Effects of visual feedback on corticostriatal activity during continuous de novo motor skill learningPreprint
Park, S., Kim, J., & Kim, S. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.08.29.555448
Human-Robot Interaction Control Based on the RBF Neural Network for Upper Limb Rehabilitation Robot
Tian, Z., Liu, K., Liu, Y., Wang, G., Shen, Y., & Sun, Z. (2023) · Asian Conference on Artificial Intelligence Technology (ACAIT) · doi:10.1109/acait60137.2023.10528527
Uncovering locomotor learning dynamics in people with Parkinson’s disease
Kim, A., Schweighofer, N., Petzinger, G. M., & Finley, J. M. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1101/2024.10.17.618863
Motorisches Lernen
Hegele, M., & Sülzenbrück, S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-68476-4_20
Reviewer #3 (Public review): Multiple Functions of Cerebello-Thalamic Neurons in Learning and Offline Consolidation of a Motor Skill in mice
(2024) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.102813.1.sa1
Relationship between overall right pre-frontal cortex activity and learning and retention of a visuomotor adaptation task: A continuous analysis
Ramos, M. Á., Busquets, A., Ferrer-Uris, B., Eken, A., Bešlija, F., Zhang, F., Durduran, T., & Angulo-Barroso, R. M. (2025) · Psychology of sport and exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2025.102827
A context-free model of savings in motor learning
Shahbazi, M., Codol, O., Michaels, J. A., & Gribble, P. L. (2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.107423.3
Population-level constraints on single neuron tuning changes during behavioral adaptationPreprint
Stealey, H. M., Zhao, Y., Lu, H., Contreras-Hernandez, E., Chang, Y.-J., Tobler, P. N., Lewis‐Peacock, J. A., & Santacruz, S. R. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.04.17.649401
Evaluating self-assistance during functional reach with a passive hydrostatic exoskeleton under artificial impairment
Manczurowsky, J., Mayne, H., Nguyen, D. H. A., Kenney, M., Whitney, J. P., & Hasson, C. J. (2025) · Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1186/s12984-025-01696-8
Protection of savings by reducing the salience of opposing errors
Javidialsaadi, M., Albert, S. T., Mutairi, B. M. S. A., & Wang, J. (2025) · npj Science of Learning · doi:10.1038/s41539-025-00352-z
A context-free model of savings in motor learningPreprint
Shahbazi, M., Codol, O., Michaels, J. A., & Gribble, P. L. (2025) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.107423
A Context-Free Model of Savings in Motor LearningPreprint
Shahbazi, M., Codol, O., Michaels, J. A., & Gribble, P. L. (2025) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.107423.1
Reviewer #2 (Public review): A Context-Free Model of Savings in Motor Learning
(2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.107423.2.sa1
A Limb-Speed-Driven Locomotor Control System and Its Ability to Adapt
Herrick, E. (2025) · doi:10.33915/etd.12974
The Impact of Different Learning Processes on Acquisition, Transfer, and Proprioception in Complex Motor TasksPreprint
Babu, R., & Block, H. J. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.10.29.684950
Sensorimotor confidence during explicit motor adaptationPreprint
Evans, M. H., & Landy, M. S. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.10.31.685783
"Can I Annoy you into Modifying your Running Behaviour?": Investigating the Validity of using Drone Noises to Modify Running Motor Behaviour
Balasubramaniam, A., Reidsma, D., & Heylen, D. (2025) · Annual Conference on Human-Computer Interaction and Sports (SportsHCI) · doi:10.1145/3749385.3749395
Explicit reward stabilizes motor output by attenuating sensory prediction error driven learningPreprint
Panthi, G., & Mutha, P. K. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.01.12.699038
Locomotor savings relies on attentional control of walking in older, but not younger adultsPreprint
Liu, S., Rosso, A. L., Baillargeon, E. M., Weinstein, A. M., & Torres‐Oviedo, G. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.01.12.698834
Multiple Functions of Cerebello-Thalamic Neurons in Learning and Offline Consolidation of a Motor Skill in micePreprint
Varani, A. P., Mailhes‐Hamon, C., Sala, R. W., Sarraudy, M., Fouda, S. E. E., Frontera, J. L., Léna, C., & Popa, D. (2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.102813.2
Use-dependent learning biases the initial state but not the learning dynamics of implicit adaptation
Luo, Y., & Wei, K. (2026) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-026-07268-z
The retrieval of previously learned motor memories is facilitated by the reinstatement of default mode network manifold structures
Rezaei, A., Areshenkoff, C. N., Gale, D. J., Oby, E. R., Smallwood, J., Flanagan, J. R., Wammes, J. D., & Gallivan, J. P. (2026) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003684
Etude des corrélats électrophysiologiques du traitement des erreurs motrices et des mécanismes de l'adaptation sensorimotrice
Torrecillos, F. (2016) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/aa66f432z8f86z4821za5e2z30e11c35f2a4
Etude des réponses oscillatoires bêta aux erreurs de mouvements : dissociation fonctionnelle et spatiale des modulations de puissance bêta observées pendant la période de préparation et après le mouvement
Alayrangues, J. (2018) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/7b6b7a86z3b3cz4afazb3f5z1b72b2fb121e
Interlimb transfer of sensorimotor adaptation : predictive factors and underlying processes
Lefumat, H. Z. (2016) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/cc575fc4z01cez4ff1zaf5aze5a825a65905
Etude des mécanismes comportementaux et neurophysiologiques consécutifs à un entrainement par imagerie motrice
Ruffino, C. (2017) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/afad887aza27fz405eza2efz7ec730dd4576
Revisiting sensorimotor adaptation : new insights from inter-task transfer of after-effects in prism adaptation
Fleury, L. (2020) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/13986d22zf404z47e4zafc6z4859d7afb56c
Interactions between the cerebellum and the striatum in PRRT2 and ADCY5 dystonia
Ekmen, A. (2021) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/1290633fz622cz42b1z8953z676e0c712c77
In-situ microbeads to study mechanical forces in 3D polarized epithelial Caco-2 cysts
Gouirand, N. (2022) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/6730700cz5336z4976z8a71z1765a2f54590
Les effets du sommeil, du passage du temps et de l'activité sur l'apprentissage moteur
Truong, C. (2023) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/7f7b52d0z6f50z49b4zbe28z59fcc37f6bb1
Crosstalk Between Auditory and Visual information in Motor Learning and Savings
White, O. (2026) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.70502
Consolidation Separates Implicit and Explicit Components of Compound Motor MemoriesPreprint
Kumar, A. S., Kumar, A. S., & Kumar, N. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.04.15.718660
Experimental Methodology
Herrera-Valenzuela, D. S. (2026) · Springer theses · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-18739-0_3
Reviewer #2 (Public review): Feedback control of recurrent circuits imposes dynamical constraints on learning
(2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.111322.1.sa1
Feedback control of recurrent circuits imposes dynamical constraints on learningPreprint
Gurnani, H., Liu, W., & Brunton, B. W. (2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.111322.1
Feedback control of recurrent circuits imposes dynamical constraints on learningPreprint
Gurnani, H., Liu, W., & Brunton, B. W. (2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.111322
eLife Assessment: Feedback control of recurrent circuits imposes dynamical constraints on learning
Ostojic, S. (2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.111322.1.sa3
Author response: Feedback control of recurrent circuits imposes dynamical constraints on learning
Gurnani, H., Liu, W., & Brunton, B. W. (2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.111322.1.sa0
Reviewer #1 (Public review): Feedback control of recurrent circuits imposes dynamical constraints on learning
(2026) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.111322.1.sa2
Adaptation to postural perturbations under fatigue produces persistent changes in neuromuscular coordinationPreprint
Nardon, M., Alessandro, C., Singh, T., & Bertucco, M. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.7571380
Global spatial errors and local feature errors drive oculomotor learning
Heins, F., & Lappe, M. (2026) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/jov.26.8.3
Data from: No enhancement of 24-hour visuomotor skill retention by post-practice caffeine administration
Hussain, S. J., & Cole, K. (2015) · Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · doi:10.5061/dryad.j91v7.1
Maximizing the Effects of Passive Training on Visuomotor Adaptation By Incorporating Other Motor Learning Strategies
Lei, Y. (2015) · UWM Digital Commons (University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee)
Uncertainty, generalization, and neural representation of relevant variables for decision making
Fernandes, H. L. (2013) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT)

Authors: Huang, V. S., Haith, A., Mazzoni, P., & Krakauer, J. W.
Affiliations: Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author: Huang, Vincent S.
Krakauer, John W.
ORCID: Huang, Vincent S.
Haith, Adrian
Mazzoni, Pietro
Krakauer, John W.
Venue: Neuron
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Published: 2011-05
Volume: 70
Issue: 4
Pages: 787-801
ISSN: 0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.04.012
PMC: PMC3134523
OpenAlex: W2130609859
Semantic Scholar: 9ba1988d958d092cb1b5a09f36c1ea4b29ef8b09
Cited by: 472
References: 95
Citations by year: 2026: 19 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 22
FWCI: 15.24
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: bronze
doi.org
Licence: www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/ (vor, 808 d)
Locations: Neuron (publishedVersion)
PubMed (publishedVersion)
Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders: National Institutes of Health (7r01ns052804-05)
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS-052804)
Topics: Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords: motor learning, visuomotor adaptation, model-based learning, internal models, savings, interference, operant reinforcement, use-dependent plasticity, error-based learning, visuomotor rotation
MeSH terms: Adaptation, Physiological, Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Memory, Models, Biological, Movement, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Rethinking Motor Learning and Savings in Adaptation Paradigms: Model-Free Memory for Successful Actions Combines with Internal Models

Abstract

Overview

AI snapshot

TL;DR

Key findings

Methods

Limitations

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Statistics recomputed

Self-check

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks