精神分裂症的奖赏-复杂性权衡。

Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) Pub Date : 2021-05-25 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.5334/cpsy.71
Samuel J Gershman, Lucy Lai
{"title":"精神分裂症的奖赏-复杂性权衡。","authors":"Samuel J Gershman, Lucy Lai","doi":"10.5334/cpsy.71","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Action selection requires a policy that maps states of the world to a distribution over actions. The amount of memory needed to specify the policy (the policy complexity) increases with the state-dependence of the policy. If there is a capacity limit for policy complexity, then there will also be a trade-off between reward and complexity, since some reward will need to be sacrificed in order to satisfy the capacity constraint. This paper empirically characterizes the trade-off between reward and complexity for both schizophrenia patients and healthy controls. Schizophrenia patients adopt lower complexity policies on average, and these policies are more strongly biased away from the optimal reward-complexity trade-off curve compared to healthy controls. However, healthy controls are also biased away from the optimal trade-off curve, and both groups appear to lie on the same empirical trade-off curve. We explain these findings using a cost-sensitive actor-critic model. Our empirical and theoretical results shed new light on cognitive effort abnormalities in schizophrenia.</p>","PeriodicalId":72664,"journal":{"name":"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11104411/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Reward-Complexity Trade-off in Schizophrenia.\",\"authors\":\"Samuel J Gershman, Lucy Lai\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/cpsy.71\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Action selection requires a policy that maps states of the world to a distribution over actions. The amount of memory needed to specify the policy (the policy complexity) increases with the state-dependence of the policy. If there is a capacity limit for policy complexity, then there will also be a trade-off between reward and complexity, since some reward will need to be sacrificed in order to satisfy the capacity constraint. This paper empirically characterizes the trade-off between reward and complexity for both schizophrenia patients and healthy controls. Schizophrenia patients adopt lower complexity policies on average, and these policies are more strongly biased away from the optimal reward-complexity trade-off curve compared to healthy controls. However, healthy controls are also biased away from the optimal trade-off curve, and both groups appear to lie on the same empirical trade-off curve. We explain these findings using a cost-sensitive actor-critic model. Our empirical and theoretical results shed new light on cognitive effort abnormalities in schizophrenia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11104411/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/cpsy.71\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/cpsy.71","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

行动选择需要一个将世界状态映射到行动分布的策略。指定策略所需的内存量(策略复杂度)会随着策略的状态依赖性而增加。如果策略复杂度存在容量限制,那么奖励和复杂度之间也会存在权衡,因为为了满足容量限制,需要牺牲一些奖励。本文从经验角度描述了精神分裂症患者和健康对照组在奖励和复杂性之间的权衡。与健康对照组相比,精神分裂症患者平均采用复杂度较低的策略,而且这些策略偏离最佳奖励-复杂度权衡曲线的程度更严重。然而,健康对照组也偏离了最优权衡曲线,两组患者似乎都位于同一条经验权衡曲线上。我们使用成本敏感的行为批评者模型来解释这些发现。我们的经验和理论结果为精神分裂症患者的认知努力异常提供了新的线索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Reward-Complexity Trade-off in Schizophrenia.

Action selection requires a policy that maps states of the world to a distribution over actions. The amount of memory needed to specify the policy (the policy complexity) increases with the state-dependence of the policy. If there is a capacity limit for policy complexity, then there will also be a trade-off between reward and complexity, since some reward will need to be sacrificed in order to satisfy the capacity constraint. This paper empirically characterizes the trade-off between reward and complexity for both schizophrenia patients and healthy controls. Schizophrenia patients adopt lower complexity policies on average, and these policies are more strongly biased away from the optimal reward-complexity trade-off curve compared to healthy controls. However, healthy controls are also biased away from the optimal trade-off curve, and both groups appear to lie on the same empirical trade-off curve. We explain these findings using a cost-sensitive actor-critic model. Our empirical and theoretical results shed new light on cognitive effort abnormalities in schizophrenia.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信