人类理性地适应对不确定性的近似估计。

IF 6.4 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
eLife Pub Date : 2025-07-08 DOI:10.7554/eLife.103734
Erdem Pulcu, Michael Browning
{"title":"人类理性地适应对不确定性的近似估计。","authors":"Erdem Pulcu, Michael Browning","doi":"10.7554/eLife.103734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Efficient learning requires estimation of, and adaptation to, different forms of uncertainty. If uncertainty is caused by randomness in outcomes (noise), observed events should have less influence on beliefs, whereas if uncertainty is caused by a change in the process being estimated (volatility) the influence of events should increase. Previously, we showed that humans respond appropriately to changes in volatility irrespective of outcome valence (Pulcu and Browning, 2017), but there is less evidence of a rational response to noise. Here, we test adaptation to variable levels of volatility and noise in human participants, using choice behaviour and pupillometry as a measure of the central arousal system. We find that participants adapt as expected to changes in volatility, but not to changes in noise. Using a Bayesian observer model, we demonstrate that participants are, in fact, adapting to estimated noise, but that their estimates are imprecise, leading them to misattribute it as volatility and thus to respond inappropriately.</p>","PeriodicalId":11640,"journal":{"name":"eLife","volume":"14 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12237418/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Humans adapt rationally to approximate estimates of uncertainty.\",\"authors\":\"Erdem Pulcu, Michael Browning\",\"doi\":\"10.7554/eLife.103734\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Efficient learning requires estimation of, and adaptation to, different forms of uncertainty. If uncertainty is caused by randomness in outcomes (noise), observed events should have less influence on beliefs, whereas if uncertainty is caused by a change in the process being estimated (volatility) the influence of events should increase. Previously, we showed that humans respond appropriately to changes in volatility irrespective of outcome valence (Pulcu and Browning, 2017), but there is less evidence of a rational response to noise. Here, we test adaptation to variable levels of volatility and noise in human participants, using choice behaviour and pupillometry as a measure of the central arousal system. We find that participants adapt as expected to changes in volatility, but not to changes in noise. Using a Bayesian observer model, we demonstrate that participants are, in fact, adapting to estimated noise, but that their estimates are imprecise, leading them to misattribute it as volatility and thus to respond inappropriately.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"eLife\",\"volume\":\"14 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12237418/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"eLife\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.103734\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eLife","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.103734","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有效的学习需要对不同形式的不确定性进行估计和适应。如果不确定性是由结果的随机性(噪声)引起的,观察到的事件对信念的影响应该较小,而如果不确定性是由被估计过程的变化(波动性)引起的,则事件的影响应该增加。之前,我们表明,人类对波动性的变化做出了适当的反应,而不考虑结果价(Pulcu和Browning, 2017),但对噪音做出理性反应的证据较少。在这里,我们测试了人类参与者对不同水平的波动和噪音的适应,使用选择行为和瞳孔测量作为中央唤醒系统的测量。我们发现,参与者如预期的那样适应波动性的变化,但不适应噪声的变化。使用贝叶斯观察者模型,我们证明了参与者实际上是适应估计的噪声的,但是他们的估计是不精确的,导致他们错误地将其归因于波动性,从而做出不适当的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Humans adapt rationally to approximate estimates of uncertainty.

Efficient learning requires estimation of, and adaptation to, different forms of uncertainty. If uncertainty is caused by randomness in outcomes (noise), observed events should have less influence on beliefs, whereas if uncertainty is caused by a change in the process being estimated (volatility) the influence of events should increase. Previously, we showed that humans respond appropriately to changes in volatility irrespective of outcome valence (Pulcu and Browning, 2017), but there is less evidence of a rational response to noise. Here, we test adaptation to variable levels of volatility and noise in human participants, using choice behaviour and pupillometry as a measure of the central arousal system. We find that participants adapt as expected to changes in volatility, but not to changes in noise. Using a Bayesian observer model, we demonstrate that participants are, in fact, adapting to estimated noise, but that their estimates are imprecise, leading them to misattribute it as volatility and thus to respond inappropriately.

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
eLife
eLife BIOLOGY-
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
3.90%
发文量
3122
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: eLife is a distinguished, not-for-profit, peer-reviewed open access scientific journal that specializes in the fields of biomedical and life sciences. eLife is known for its selective publication process, which includes a variety of article types such as: Research Articles: Detailed reports of original research findings. Short Reports: Concise presentations of significant findings that do not warrant a full-length research article. Tools and Resources: Descriptions of new tools, technologies, or resources that facilitate scientific research. Research Advances: Brief reports on significant scientific advancements that have immediate implications for the field. Scientific Correspondence: Short communications that comment on or provide additional information related to published articles. Review Articles: Comprehensive overviews of a specific topic or field within the life sciences.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信