Fast rule switching and slow rule updating in a perceptual categorization task

  1. Flora Bouchacourt
  2. Sina Tafazoli
  3. Marcelo Mattar
  4. Timothy J Buschman
  5. Nathaniel D Daw  Is a corresponding author
  1. Princeton University, United States
  2. University of California, San Diego, United States

Abstract

To adapt to a changing world, we must be able to switch between rules already learned and, at other times, learn rules anew. Often we must do both at the same time, switching between known rules while also constantly re-estimating them. Here, we show these two processes, rule switching and rule learning, rely on distinct but intertwined computations, namely fast inference and slower incremental learning. To this end, we studied how monkeys switched between three rules. Each rule was compositional, requiring the animal to discriminate one of two features of a stimulus and then respond with an associated eye movement along one of two different response axes. By modeling behavior we found the animals learned the axis of response using fast inference (rule switching) while continuously re-estimating the stimulus-response associations within an axis (rule learning). Our results shed light on the computational interactions between rule switching and rule learning, and make testable neural predictions for these interactions.

Data availability

Codes and data supporting the findings of this study is available on GitHub (https://github.com/buschman- lab/FastRuleSwitchingSlowRuleUpdating).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Flora Bouchacourt

    Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8893-0143
  2. Sina Tafazoli

    Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Marcelo Mattar

    Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Timothy J Buschman

    Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1298-2761
  5. Nathaniel D Daw

    Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    For correspondence
    ndaw@princeton.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5029-1430

Funding

U.S. Army Research Office (ARO W911NF-16-1-047)

  • Nathaniel D Daw

NIMH (R01MH129492)

  • Timothy J Buschman

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experimental procedures were approved by Princeton University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (protocol #3055) and were in accordance with the policies and procedures of the National Institutes of Health.

Copyright

© 2022, Bouchacourt et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,277
    views
  • 344
    downloads
  • 5
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Flora Bouchacourt
  2. Sina Tafazoli
  3. Marcelo Mattar
  4. Timothy J Buschman
  5. Nathaniel D Daw
(2022)
Fast rule switching and slow rule updating in a perceptual categorization task
eLife 11:e82531.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82531

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82531

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Paul I Jaffe, Gustavo X Santiago-Reyes ... Russell A Poldrack
    Research Article

    Evidence accumulation models (EAMs) are the dominant framework for modeling response time (RT) data from speeded decision-making tasks. While providing a good quantitative description of RT data in terms of abstract perceptual representations, EAMs do not explain how the visual system extracts these representations in the first place. To address this limitation, we introduce the visual accumulator model (VAM), in which convolutional neural network models of visual processing and traditional EAMs are jointly fitted to trial-level RTs and raw (pixel-space) visual stimuli from individual subjects in a unified Bayesian framework. Models fitted to large-scale cognitive training data from a stylized flanker task captured individual differences in congruency effects, RTs, and accuracy. We find evidence that the selection of task-relevant information occurs through the orthogonalization of relevant and irrelevant representations, demonstrating how our framework can be used to relate visual representations to behavioral outputs. Together, our work provides a probabilistic framework for both constraining neural network models of vision with behavioral data and studying how the visual system extracts representations that guide decisions.

    1. Neuroscience
    Aneri Soni, Michael J Frank
    Research Article

    How and why is working memory (WM) capacity limited? Traditional cognitive accounts focus either on limitations on the number or items that can be stored (slots models), or loss of precision with increasing load (resource models). Here, we show that a neural network model of prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia can learn to reuse the same prefrontal populations to store multiple items, leading to resource-like constraints within a slot-like system, and inducing a trade-off between quantity and precision of information. Such ‘chunking’ strategies are adapted as a function of reinforcement learning and WM task demands, mimicking human performance and normative models. Moreover, adaptive performance requires a dynamic range of dopaminergic signals to adjust striatal gating policies, providing a new interpretation of WM difficulties in patient populations such as Parkinson’s disease, ADHD, and schizophrenia. These simulations also suggest a computational rather than anatomical limit to WM capacity.