The value of initiating a pursuit in temporal decision-making.

IF 6.4 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY eLife Pub Date : 2025-03-28 DOI:10.7554/eLife.99957
Elissa Sutlief, Charlie Walters, Tanya Marton, Marshall G Hussain Shuler
{"title":"The value of initiating a pursuit in temporal decision-making.","authors":"Elissa Sutlief, Charlie Walters, Tanya Marton, Marshall G Hussain Shuler","doi":"10.7554/eLife.99957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Reward-rate maximization is a prominent normative principle in behavioral ecology, neuroscience, economics, and AI. Here, we identify, compare, and analyze equations to maximize reward rate when assessing whether to initiate a pursuit. In deriving expressions for the value of a pursuit, we show that time's cost consists of both apportionment and opportunity cost. Reformulating value as a discounting function, we show precisely how a reward-rate-optimal agent's discounting function (1) combines hyperbolic and linear components reflecting apportionment and opportunity costs, and (2) is dependent not only on the considered pursuit's properties but also on time spent and rewards obtained outside the pursuit. This analysis reveals how purported signs of suboptimal behavior (hyperbolic discounting, and the Delay, Magnitude, and Sign effects) are in fact consistent with reward-rate maximization. To better account for observed decision-making errors in humans and animals, we then analyze the impact of misestimating reward-rate-maximizing parameters and find that suboptimal decisions likely stem from errors in assessing time's apportionment-specifically, underweighting time spent outside versus inside a pursuit-which we term the 'Malapportionment Hypothesis'. This understanding of the true pattern of temporal decision-making errors is essential to deducing the learning algorithms and representational architectures actually used by humans and animals.</p>","PeriodicalId":11640,"journal":{"name":"eLife","volume":"13 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11952749/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eLife","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.99957","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

Abstract

Reward-rate maximization is a prominent normative principle in behavioral ecology, neuroscience, economics, and AI. Here, we identify, compare, and analyze equations to maximize reward rate when assessing whether to initiate a pursuit. In deriving expressions for the value of a pursuit, we show that time's cost consists of both apportionment and opportunity cost. Reformulating value as a discounting function, we show precisely how a reward-rate-optimal agent's discounting function (1) combines hyperbolic and linear components reflecting apportionment and opportunity costs, and (2) is dependent not only on the considered pursuit's properties but also on time spent and rewards obtained outside the pursuit. This analysis reveals how purported signs of suboptimal behavior (hyperbolic discounting, and the Delay, Magnitude, and Sign effects) are in fact consistent with reward-rate maximization. To better account for observed decision-making errors in humans and animals, we then analyze the impact of misestimating reward-rate-maximizing parameters and find that suboptimal decisions likely stem from errors in assessing time's apportionment-specifically, underweighting time spent outside versus inside a pursuit-which we term the 'Malapportionment Hypothesis'. This understanding of the true pattern of temporal decision-making errors is essential to deducing the learning algorithms and representational architectures actually used by humans and animals.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在时间决策中发起追求的价值。
奖励率最大化是行为生态学、神经科学、经济学和人工智能领域的重要规范原则。在这里,我们识别,比较和分析方程,以最大化奖励率时,评估是否发起追捕。在推导追求价值的表达式时,我们表明时间成本由分配成本和机会成本两部分组成。将价值重新表述为折现函数,我们精确地展示了一个奖励率最优的智能体的折现函数(1)是如何结合了反映分配和机会成本的双曲和线性成分,以及(2)不仅取决于所考虑的追求的性质,还取决于所花费的时间和在追求之外获得的奖励。这个分析揭示了所谓的次优行为的迹象(双曲折扣、延迟、幅度和符号效应)实际上与奖励率最大化是一致的。为了更好地解释在人类和动物中观察到的决策错误,我们分析了错误估计奖励率最大化参数的影响,并发现次优决策可能源于评估时间分配的错误——具体来说,低估了花在外部而不是内部的时间——我们称之为“分配不当假说”。这种对时间决策错误的真实模式的理解对于推导人类和动物实际使用的学习算法和表征体系结构至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 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.
期刊最新文献
The 1000+ mouse project for large-scale spatiotemporal parametrization and modeling of preclinical cancer immunotherapies. Contributions of insula and superior temporal sulcus to interpersonal guilt and responsibility in social decisions. A deep learning pipeline for mapping in situ network-level neurovascular coupling in multi-photon fluorescence microscopy. Visual information is broadcast among cortical areas in discrete channels. Adaptor protein supersaturation drives innate immune signaling and cell fate.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1