DYNAMIC RESPONSE-BY-RESPONSE MODELS OF MATCHING BEHAVIOR IN RHESUS MONKEYS

May combine two claims.

Adding polynomial covariates for nonlinear transformations of relative reinforcer frequency and magnitude to Equation 2 accounted for quadratic and cubic deviations but increased average variance explained by only 1.8% (range 0.31-3.81%) in the reinforcer frequency conditions and 1.5% (range 0.13-2.63%) in the reinforcer magnitude conditions.

“Including these covariates accounted for quadratic and cubic deviations in the data, but only increased the average percentage of variance explained by 1.8% (range, 0.31 to 3.81%) and 1.5% (range, 0.13 to 2.63%) for the reinforcer frequency and reinforcer magnitude conditions, respectively.”

May combine two claims.

Local linear weightings of past reinforcers predict the choice behavior of monkeys performing a matching task, with weights similar to those suggested by reinforcer rate estimation models.

“We have found that local linear weightings of past reinforcers predict the choice behavior of monkeys performing a matching task, with weights similar to those suggested by reinforcer rate estimation models, but we extend this to show that accounting for recent choices also is required for accurate predictions by models of this type.”

May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

There was a rapid acquisition period following an unsignalled block transition, and the choice curves diverged for the two possible posttransition ratios.

“There was a rapid acquisition period following the transition, and the curves diverged for the two possible posttransition ratios.”

May combine two claims.

For both monkeys, the coefficients for reinforcer history are similar in shape for the probability and magnitude conditions, although the coefficients are larger in the probability conditions.

“For both monkeys, the coefficients for reinforcer history are similar in shape for both the probability and magnitude conditions, although the coefficients are larger in the probability conditions.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Past reinforcers and choices are linearly combined to determine choice on each trial.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The effects of past reinforcers and choices are symmetric: a past reinforcer or choice to the right changes the odds of choosing right by the same amount that a past reinforcer or choice to the left changes the odds of choosing left.

May combine two claims.

Positive coefficients for trials further in the past than the last trial mean that choosing a particular alternative some time in the past increases the likelihood of choosing it again, independent of past reinforcers; alone these would produce a tendency to persist.

“Positive coefficients for the trials further in the past than the last trial mean that choosing a particular alternative some time in the past increases the likelihood of choosing it again, independent of the effects due to past reinforcers. Alone, these coefficients would produce a tendency to persist on an alternative.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Past reinforcers and choices are linearly combined to determine choice on each trial.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The effects of past reinforcers and choices are symmetric: a past reinforcer or choice to the right changes the odds of choosing right by the same amount that a past reinforcer or choice to the left changes the odds of choosing left.

May combine two claims.

Monkeys adjusted their choice behavior in response to abrupt reversals in the prevailing reinforcer conditions, reaching an average steady-state of responding after obtaining relatively few reinforcers under the new schedule conditions.

“Monkeys adjusted their choice behavior in response to abrupt reversals in the prevailing reinforcer conditions, reaching an average steady-state of responding after obtaining relatively few reinforcers under the new schedule conditions.”

May combine two claims.

Runlengths for the nonpreferred alternative became very short, typically one trial, with a mean across all preferences of 1.05 trials and a standard deviation of 0.09.

“Almost as soon as one of the alternatives was preferred, the runlengths for the nonpreferred alternative became very short, typically one trial (mean across all preferences was 1.05 trials with a standard deviation of 0.09).”

May combine two claims.

For both monkeys, the residual autocorrelations for the best-fitting model stayed mostly within the 95% confidence intervals expected from an independent random process, indicating that the residuals were largely unstructured.

“For both monkeys, the autocorrelations stayed mostly within these confidence intervals, indicating that the residuals were largely unstructured.”

May combine two claims.

The best-fitting model's predictions captured the steady-state average as well as the dynamics of the transitions between blocks.

“The model predictions captured the steady-state average as well as the dynamics of the transitions between blocks.”

May combine two claims.

By accounting for the effects of past choices, the monkeys showed a short-term tendency to alternate as well as a longer-term tendency to persist on the more frequently chosen alternative.

“By accounting for the effects of past choices we showed that our monkeys have a short-term tendency to alternate as well as a longer-term tendency to persist on the more frequently chosen alternative.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Past reinforcers and choices are linearly combined to determine choice on each trial.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The effects of past reinforcers and choices are symmetric: a past reinforcer or choice to the right changes the odds of choosing right by the same amount that a past reinforcer or choice to the left changes the odds of choosing left.

May combine two claims.

The pattern of results for reinforcer history is similar for both animals: the most recent reinforcers strongly increased the odds of choosing the reinforced alternative again, and this influence decayed as reinforcers receded in time.

“The pattern of results for reinforcer history is similar for both animals; the most recent reinforcers strongly increased the odds of choosing the reinforced alternative again, and this influence decayed as reinforcers receded in time.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Past reinforcers and choices are linearly combined to determine choice on each trial.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The effects of past reinforcers and choices are symmetric: a past reinforcer or choice to the right changes the odds of choosing right by the same amount that a past reinforcer or choice to the left changes the odds of choosing left.

May combine two claims.

The actual runlength data systematically deviate from and reject the purely probabilistic model.

“The actual runlength data systematically deviate from and hence reject this model”

May combine two claims.

There was little or no spatial bias towards either alternative, consistent with the steady-state analysis using the generalized matching law.

“There was little or no spatial bias towards either alternative, which was consistent with our steady-state analysis using the generalized matching law.”

May combine two claims.

The negative coefficient for the last trial means that choosing a particular alternative decreased the odds of choosing that alternative again on the next trial, independent of reinforcer history; alone this would produce a tendency to alternate.

“The negative coefficient for the last trial means that choosing a particular alternative decreased the odds of choosing that alternative again on the next trial, independent of any effects due to reinforcer history. Alone, this coefficient would produce a tendency to alternate.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Past reinforcers and choices are linearly combined to determine choice on each trial.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The effects of past reinforcers and choices are symmetric: a past reinforcer or choice to the right changes the odds of choosing right by the same amount that a past reinforcer or choice to the left changes the odds of choosing left.

May combine two claims.

The monkeys tend to stay at the richer alternative, switching briefly to sample the leaner alternative.

“Instead, they show that the monkeys tend to stay at the richer alternative, switching briefly to sample the leaner alternative.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The data analyzed were 67,827 completed trials from Monkey H and 47,160 completed trials from Monkey B.

“The data analyzed were 67,827 completed trials from Monkey H and 47,160 completed trials from Monkey B.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The strict matching law equates the relative number of choices to the relative reinforcer frequency.

“The strict matching law equates these two quantities; the relative number of choices matches the relative reinforcer frequency (Herrnstein, 1961).”

• cites Herrnstein, 1961 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The mean number of trials per block observed was 121 trials for Monkey H and 125 trials for Monkey B, after excluding aborted trials.

“The mean number of trials per block observed was 121 trials for Monkey H and 125 trials for Monkey B, after excluding aborted trials.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The generalized matching law for reinforcer frequency and magnitude assumes that these attributes have independent effects but allows for differential levels of control by each variable.

“The generalized matching law for reinforcer frequency and magnitude assumes that these attributes have independent effects (Baum & Rachlin, 1969), but allows for differential levels of control by each variable;”

• cites Baum & Rachlin, 1969Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Single neurons in a number of cortical areas have activity correlated with reinforcer frequency and magnitude.

“Single neurons in a number of cortical areas have activity correlated with reinforcer frequency (Barraclough, Conroy, & Lee, 2004; Platt & Glimcher, 1999; Sugrue et al., 2004) and magnitude (Platt & Glimcher, 1999).”

• cites Barraclough, Conroy, & Lee, 2004 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Platt & Glimcher, 1999 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Sugrue et al., 2004 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

All the data reported were collected after at least 3 months of training on the choice task.

“All the data reported were collected after at least 3 months of training on the choice task.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

If monkeys chose purely probabilistically by flipping a weighted coin on each trial with weight dictated by degree of preference, runlengths would be distributed geometrically with mean equal to the reciprocal of the coin weight.

“If the monkeys chose in a purely probabilistic manner by flipping a weighted coin on each trial, with the weight dictated by the degree of preference (e.g., a 2∶1 preference gives a two-thirds probability of choosing the preferred alternative on each trial), the runlengths would be distributed geometrically with a mean equal to the reciprocal of the coin weight.”

• cites Houston & Sumida, 1987Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: In the purely probabilistic baseline model, choices are independent between trials, so the degree of weighting of the coin fully specifies the runlength distributions.

May combine two claims.

The generalized matching law is a reasonable description of the monkeys' data, even though it is typically used to describe data after many sessions rather than trials of training under the same reinforcer conditions.

“This indicates that the generalized matching law is a reasonable description of our data, even though it typically is used to describe data after many sessions, rather than trials, of training under the same reinforcer conditions.”

May combine two claims.

Behavioral models incorporating dependence on both past reinforcers and choices may provide more accurate predictions, which will be essential for correlation with neural activity.

“The present results suggest that behavioral models incorporating dependence on both past reinforcers and choices may provide more accurate predictions, which will be essential for correlation with neural activity.”

May combine two claims.

The generalized matching law describes an enormous amount of data collected from many species and allows one to predict average choice behavior under different conditions.

“The generalized matching law describes an enormous amount of data collected from many species (de Villiers, 1977), and allows one to predict average choice behavior under different conditions, such as for arbitrary combinations of reinforcer frequency and magnitude.”

• cites de Villiers, 1977Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The monkeys rarely aborted trials (7% for Monkey H and 6% for Monkey B), and these trials were excluded from analyses.

“The monkeys rarely aborted trials (7% and 6% of trials for Monkey H and Monkey B, respectively), and these trials were excluded from our analyses.”

May combine two claims.

The generalized matching law only describes average choice and is silent regarding the sequences of choices underlying those averages.

“Although the generalized matching law fits the steady-state behavior that we measured, it only describes average choice. It is silent regarding the sequences of choices underlying these averages.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Many plausible theoretical models incorporate some form of reinforcer rate estimation using linear weightings of past reinforcers.

“Many of the more plausible—in the sense that animals may actually implement them—theoretical models incorporate some form of reinforcer rate estimation using linear weightings of past reinforcers (e.g., Killeen, 1981; Luce, 1959).”

• cites Killeen, 1981Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Luce, 1959Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Differences in AIC values represent the degree of evidence in favor of the best-fitting model, and values greater than 10 provide strong support for the model with the smallest AIC value.

“The differences in AIC values in Table 3 represent the degree of evidence in favor of the best-fitting model, and the simpler models were selected to give a sense of the contribution of each model component. The larger the difference the less plausible a model is compared to the best model; values greater than 10 on this scale provide strong support for the model with the smallest AIC value (Burnh”

• cites Burnham & Anderson, 1998 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The decision process can be split into a first stage that estimates the subjective value of each alternative from past experience and a second stage that forms a decision by comparing these estimates.

“In the first stage, the subjective value of each alternative is estimated from past experience, and in the second stage a decision is formed by comparing these estimates.”

May combine two claims.

A model that only incorporates reinforcer history, excluding choice history regressors, is inadequate and indicates the need to incorporate the effects of past choices to account for the response-by-response structure in the task.

“This model is inadequate, and clearly indicates the need to incorporate the effects of past choices to account for the response-by-response structure in our task.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Because the model is linear in its parameters, the coefficients weighting past reinforcers can be rescaled so that they sum to 1.

“Because the model is linear in the parameters, the coefficients weighting past reinforcers can be rescaled so they sum to 1.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The first stage of the model includes the effects of past reinforcers, which provide estimates of the rate of reinforcement.

“As we have sketched it, the first stage includes the effects of past reinforcers, which we think of as providing estimates of the rate of reinforcement.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Animals form internal representations about recently obtained reinforcers.

May combine two claims.

The fix-and-sample pattern comes about because larger or more frequent reinforcers increase the likelihood of repeating choices to the alternative that yields them; momentary decreases in rich reinforcers eventually cause a switch to the lean alternative, followed by a tendency to switch immediately back to the rich alternative due to longer-term choice history effects.

“This pattern comes about because larger or more frequent reinforcers increase the likelihood of repeating choices to the alternative that yields them. Momentary decreases in rich reinforcers eventually cause a switch to the lean alternative, followed by a tendency to switch immediately back to the rich alternative due to longer-term choice history effects.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The estimate of the difference in average reinforcer rate has units of reinforcer magnitude per trial and is passed to the second stage to form a choice probability.

“This estimate has units of reinforcer magnitude per trial, and is passed to the second stage to form a choice probability.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Baum, Schwendiman, and Bell (1999) observed the fix-and-sample pattern in pigeons under concurrent VI VI schedules.

“Baum, Schwendiman, and Bell (1999) observed this pattern of behavior in pigeons under concurrent VI VI schedules, terming it “fix-and-sample.””

• cites Baum, Schwendiman, and Bell (1999)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The stronger undermatching observed may have occurred because the reinforcement contingencies were reversed many times during a single session.

“In addition, we may have observed stronger undermatching because we reversed the reinforcement contingencies many times during a single session.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Baum et al. showed that the sequential structure varied depending on presence or absence of a changeover delay; pigeons adjust their patterns of choice behavior to respect fluctuations in local probability of reinforcement.

“Moreover, Baum et al. showed that the sequential structure varied depending on presence or absence of a changeover delay; pigeons adjust their patterns of choice behavior to respect the fluctuations in local probability of reinforcement.”

• cites Baum et al.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Many theoretical models of foraging and repeated choice assume that the rate of prey encounter or reinforcement is a fundamental variable that animals use to achieve the computational goals of maximizing fitness or reinforcement.

“Many theoretical models of foraging and repeated choice behavior assume that the rate of prey encounter or reinforcement is a fundamental variable that animals use to achieve the computational goals of maximizing fitness or reinforcement (Stephens & Krebs, 1986).”

• cites Stephens & Krebs, 1986Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Response-by-response dependencies could have arisen from effects of past reinforcers and/or past choices, but sequential statistics like runlengths cannot reveal how this occurs because they do not take into account when reinforcers were delivered.

“These response-by-response dependencies could have arisen from the effects of past reinforcers and/or past choices, but how this occurs cannot be revealed through sequential statistics like runlengths because they do not take into account when reinforcers were delivered.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

It is common to split the decision process into valuation and comparison stages.

“It is common to split the decision process in this manner (e.g., Davis, Staddon, Machado, & Palmer, 1993; Houston, Kacelnik, & McNamara, 1982; Luce, 1959).”

• cites Davis, Staddon, Machado, & Palmer, 1993Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Houston, Kacelnik, & McNamara, 1982Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Luce, 1959Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Relative to Monkey H, the coefficients for Monkey B are initially larger but decay more quickly, indicating that recent reinforcers would shift preference more strongly but their effects are more local in time.

“Relative to Monkey H, the coefficients for Monkey B are initially larger, but also decay more quickly, indicating that recent reinforcers would shift preference more strongly, but that their effects are more local in time.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Past reinforcers and choices are linearly combined to determine choice on each trial.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The effects of past reinforcers and choices are symmetric: a past reinforcer or choice to the right changes the odds of choosing right by the same amount that a past reinforcer or choice to the left changes the odds of choosing left.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Rate estimation is usually implemented by a weighted average with exponential decay.

“Rate estimation is usually implemented by a weighted average with exponential decay (Killeen, 1981, 1994), which captures the intuitive notion that because natural environments are nonstationary, recent events should weigh more heavily in memory than long-past events (Cowie, 1977).”

• cites Killeen, 1981, 1994Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Cowie, 1977 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Houston and McNamara (1981) prove that reinforcer rate is maximized by repeating a deterministic sequence; an optimal subject would choose the rich alternative a fixed number of times followed by a single choice of the lean alternative.

“Houston and McNamara (1981) prove that reinforcer rate is maximized by repeating a deterministic sequence; an optimal subject would choose the rich alternative a fixed number of times (dictated by the particular schedules) followed by a single choice of the lean alternative (see also Staddon et al., 1981).”

• cites Houston and McNamara (1981)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Staddon et al., 1981 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

In such tasks, it eventually pays to choose the lean alternative, but it is never worth staying more than one trial.

“Because the probability of reinforcement grows geometrically with time or responses spent away from the lean alternative in tasks like the one we used, it eventually pays to choose that alternative, but because its probability is reset to its initial low value once chosen it is never worth staying more than one trial.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta and the ventral tegmental area appear to be important for estimating reinforcement rate.

“For example, the dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNC) and the ventral tegmental area (VTA) appear to be important for estimating reinforcement rate.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Characterizing the effects of past reinforcers and choices allows a finer separation of these effects at the neural level.

“characterizing the effects of past reinforcers and choices allows a finer separation of these effects at the neural level.”

May combine two claims.

Bayer and Glimcher showed that the number of action potentials discharged by individual SNC neurons is proportional to the magnitude of the difference between the expected and obtained reinforcer, supporting the hypothesis that dopamine neurons underlie computation of prediction error.

“They showed that the number of action potentials discharged by individual SNC neurons is proportional to the magnitude of the difference between the reinforcer expected (vi−1) and the reinforcer actually obtained (ri), thereby lending strong support to the hypothesis that dopamine neurons underlie the computation of prediction error.”

• cites Bayer and Glimcher (2005) sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Evidence indicates that frontal cortex and the basal ganglia are important for the expression and learning of motor sequences.

“This idea is consistent with evidence that frontal cortex and the basal ganglia—which are densely interconnected—are important for the expression and learning of motor sequences (Hikosaka et al., 1999; Tanji, 2001; Tanji & Hoshi, 2001).”

• cites Hikosaka et al., 1999 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Tanji, 2001Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Tanji & Hoshi, 2001Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

These neurons send dense projections to prefrontal cortex and striatum, and current evidence suggests these areas may use a prediction error to estimate reinforcer rate.

“These neurons send dense projections to the prefrontal cortex and the striatum, and current evidence suggests that these areas may use a prediction error to estimate reinforcer rate (Barraclough et al., 2004; Haruno et al., 2004; O'Doherty et al., 2004).”

• cites Barraclough et al., 2004 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Haruno et al., 2004 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites O'Doherty et al., 2004 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Experiments with monkeys and humans have shown that SNC/VTA neurons encode a prediction error, the difference between the reinforcer expected and the reinforcer obtained within a trial.

“Experiments with monkeys and humans have shown that these neurons encode a prediction error, the difference between the reinforcer expected and the reinforcer obtained within a trial (O'Doherty et al., 2004; Schultz, 1998).”

• cites O'Doherty et al., 2004 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Schultz, 1998 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Appropriate use of recent memory for past responses can generate tendencies to shift away from or persist on recently chosen alternatives, and is necessary for producing patterned sequences of responses.

“Appropriate use of recent memory for past responses can generate tendencies to shift away from, or to persist on, recently chosen alternatives (negative recency and positive recency), and is necessary for producing patterned sequences of responses.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The covariation of neural activity in parietal cortex with behaviorally relevant variables likely reflects computations carried out in other brain areas.

“The covariation of neural activity in the parietal cortex with behaviorally relevant variables likely reflects computations carried out in other brain areas.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Bayer and Glimcher (2005) linked SNC activity to reinforcement-rate estimation using the exponentially weighted average.

“Bayer and Glimcher (2005) linked SNC activity to reinforcement-rate estimation using the exponentially weighted average described above.”

• cites Bayer and Glimcher (2005) sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Devenport and Devenport (1994) propose a temporal weighting rule that weights past reinforcers hyperbolically with respect to units of time.

“For example, Devenport and Devenport (1994) propose a temporal weighting rule that weights past reinforcers hyperbolically (with respect to units of time).”

• cites Devenport and Devenport (1994)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The decision stage of many choice models uses rules including selecting the most valuable alternative, matching choice proportions to local rates of reinforcement, and the logistic/softmax/logit function.

“The decision stage of many choice models uses rules including simply selecting the most valuable alternative (Herrnstein & Vaughan, 1980), matching choice proportions to the local rates of reinforcement (Kacelnik, Krebs, & Ens, 1987), and the logistic function we have used, which is commonly referred to as the softmax (Sutton & Barto, 1998) or logit (Camerer & Ho, 1998) decision rule.”

• cites Herrnstein & Vaughan, 1980Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Kacelnik, Krebs, & Ens, 1987Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Sutton & Barto, 1998Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

One can only remember so much information, but what one does with that memory presumably depends on reinforcement contingencies and other factors.

“This captures the idea that one can only remember so much information, but it is distinct from what one does with that memory, which presumably depends on reinforcement contingencies and other factors (Glimcher, 2005; Neuringer, 2002).”

• cites Glimcher, 2005 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Neuringer, 2002 sourceNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

These variables must be represented in the nervous system if they are to affect choice.

“These variables must be represented in the nervous system if they are to affect choice”

May combine two claims.

In tasks like the one used, the probability of reinforcement grows geometrically with time or responses spent away from the lean alternative, and is reset to its initial low value once chosen.

“Because the probability of reinforcement grows geometrically with time or responses spent away from the lean alternative in tasks like the one we used, it eventually pays to choose that alternative, but because its probability is reset to its initial low value once chosen it is never worth staying more than one trial.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

For an animal foraging for food, evaluating which patch to forage at is a complex combination of estimating the reinforcement rate at each patch, the likelihood that an alternative patch has recently become richer, the risk of predation, and other factors.

“For an animal foraging for food, evaluating which patch to forage at is a complex combination of estimating the reinforcement rate at each patch, the likelihood that an alternative patch has recently become richer, the risk of predation, and so on.”