Cited by 118Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorReinforcement Learning in Robotics

Human reinforcement learning subdivides structured action spaces by learning effector-specific values

Open access
Gershman, Samuel J., Pesaran, Bijan, Daw, Nathaniel D.·2009·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Humans and animals are endowed with a large number of effectors. Although this enables great behavioral flexibility, it presents an equally formidable reinforcement learning problem of discovering which actions are most valuable because of the high dimensionality of the action space. An unresolved question is how neural systems for reinforcement learning-such as prediction error signals for action valuation associated with dopamine and the striatum-can cope with this "curse of dimensionality." We propose a reinforcement learning framework that allows for learned action valuations to be decomposed into effector-specific components when appropriate to a task, and test it by studying to what extent human behavior and blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) activity can exploit such a decomposition in a multieffector choice task. Subjects made simultaneous decisions with their left and right hands and received separate reward feedback for each hand movement. We found that choice behavior was better described by a learning model that decomposed the values of bimanual movements into separate values for each effector, rather than a traditional model that treated the bimanual actions as unitary with a single value. A decomposition of value into effector-specific components was also observed in value-related BOLD signaling, in the form of lateralized biases in striatal correlates of prediction error and anticipatory value correlates in the intraparietal sulcus. These results suggest that the human brain can use decomposed value representations to "divide and conquer" reinforcement learning over high-dimensional action spaces.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.2469-09.2009

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gershman, S. J., Pesaran, B., & Daw, N. D.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2009-10-28
Volume
29
Issue
43
Pages
13524-13531
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2011214729
Cited by
118
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 12
FWCI
3.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • McKnight Endowment Fund for Neuroscience
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • McKnight Foundation
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH087882)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
Keywords
human reinforcement learning, high-dimensional action spaces, bimanual movement, prediction error, dopamine, striatum, intraparietal sulcus, laterality, BOLD activation, choice behavior
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Analysis of Variance, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Choice Behavior, Hand, Humans, Functional Laterality, Learning, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Models, Psychological, Motor Activity, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Psychomotor Performance, Reinforcement, Psychology

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.

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