通过预测误差及其他因素解释多巴胺。

IF 21.2 1区 医学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Nature neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1038/s41593-024-01705-4
Samuel J. Gershman, John A. Assad, Sandeep Robert Datta, Scott W. Linderman, Bernardo L. Sabatini, Naoshige Uchida, Linda Wilbrecht
{"title":"通过预测误差及其他因素解释多巴胺。","authors":"Samuel J. Gershman, John A. Assad, Sandeep Robert Datta, Scott W. Linderman, Bernardo L. Sabatini, Naoshige Uchida, Linda Wilbrecht","doi":"10.1038/s41593-024-01705-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most influential account of phasic dopamine holds that it reports reward prediction errors (RPEs). The RPE-based interpretation of dopamine signaling is, in its original form, probably too simple and fails to explain all the properties of phasic dopamine observed in behaving animals. This Perspective helps to resolve some of the conflicting interpretations of dopamine that currently exist in the literature. We focus on the following three empirical challenges to the RPE theory of dopamine: why does dopamine (1) ramp up as animals approach rewards, (2) respond to sensory and motor features and (3) influence action selection? We argue that the prediction error concept, once it has been suitably modified and generalized based on an analysis of each computational problem, answers each challenge. Nonetheless, there are a number of additional empirical findings that appear to demand fundamentally different theoretical explanations beyond encoding RPE. Therefore, looking forward, we discuss the prospects for a unifying theory that respects the diversity of dopamine signaling and function as well as the complex circuitry that both underlies and responds to dopaminergic transmission. The hypothesis that dopamine reports reward prediction errors has been both influential and controversial. This Perspective characterizes the present state of evidence, indicating where it succeeds and where it falls short. A complete account of dopamine will probably need to move beyond the reward prediction error hypothesis while retaining its core explanatory power.","PeriodicalId":19076,"journal":{"name":"Nature neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":21.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Explaining dopamine through prediction errors and beyond\",\"authors\":\"Samuel J. Gershman, John A. Assad, Sandeep Robert Datta, Scott W. Linderman, Bernardo L. Sabatini, Naoshige Uchida, Linda Wilbrecht\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41593-024-01705-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The most influential account of phasic dopamine holds that it reports reward prediction errors (RPEs). The RPE-based interpretation of dopamine signaling is, in its original form, probably too simple and fails to explain all the properties of phasic dopamine observed in behaving animals. This Perspective helps to resolve some of the conflicting interpretations of dopamine that currently exist in the literature. We focus on the following three empirical challenges to the RPE theory of dopamine: why does dopamine (1) ramp up as animals approach rewards, (2) respond to sensory and motor features and (3) influence action selection? We argue that the prediction error concept, once it has been suitably modified and generalized based on an analysis of each computational problem, answers each challenge. Nonetheless, there are a number of additional empirical findings that appear to demand fundamentally different theoretical explanations beyond encoding RPE. Therefore, looking forward, we discuss the prospects for a unifying theory that respects the diversity of dopamine signaling and function as well as the complex circuitry that both underlies and responds to dopaminergic transmission. The hypothesis that dopamine reports reward prediction errors has been both influential and controversial. This Perspective characterizes the present state of evidence, indicating where it succeeds and where it falls short. A complete account of dopamine will probably need to move beyond the reward prediction error hypothesis while retaining its core explanatory power.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature neuroscience\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":21.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-024-01705-4\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-024-01705-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对相位多巴胺最有影响力的解释是,它报告奖赏预测错误(RPE)。基于奖赏预测误差的多巴胺信号传导解释最初的形式可能过于简单,无法解释在行为动物身上观察到的相位多巴胺的所有特性。本视角有助于解决目前文献中对多巴胺的一些相互矛盾的解释。我们重点讨论了多巴胺 RPE 理论面临的以下三个经验挑战:为什么多巴胺(1)会在动物接近奖励时升高,(2)会对感觉和运动特征做出反应,(3)会影响行动选择?我们认为,预测误差概念一旦根据对每个计算问题的分析进行适当修改和概括,就能回答每个难题。尽管如此,除了编码 RPE 之外,还有一些其他的经验发现似乎需要从根本上不同的理论解释。因此,展望未来,我们将讨论统一理论的前景,该理论将尊重多巴胺信号传递和功能的多样性,以及作为多巴胺能传递的基础并对其做出反应的复杂回路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Explaining dopamine through prediction errors and beyond
The most influential account of phasic dopamine holds that it reports reward prediction errors (RPEs). The RPE-based interpretation of dopamine signaling is, in its original form, probably too simple and fails to explain all the properties of phasic dopamine observed in behaving animals. This Perspective helps to resolve some of the conflicting interpretations of dopamine that currently exist in the literature. We focus on the following three empirical challenges to the RPE theory of dopamine: why does dopamine (1) ramp up as animals approach rewards, (2) respond to sensory and motor features and (3) influence action selection? We argue that the prediction error concept, once it has been suitably modified and generalized based on an analysis of each computational problem, answers each challenge. Nonetheless, there are a number of additional empirical findings that appear to demand fundamentally different theoretical explanations beyond encoding RPE. Therefore, looking forward, we discuss the prospects for a unifying theory that respects the diversity of dopamine signaling and function as well as the complex circuitry that both underlies and responds to dopaminergic transmission. The hypothesis that dopamine reports reward prediction errors has been both influential and controversial. This Perspective characterizes the present state of evidence, indicating where it succeeds and where it falls short. A complete account of dopamine will probably need to move beyond the reward prediction error hypothesis while retaining its core explanatory power.
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
Nature neuroscience
Nature neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
38.60
自引率
1.20%
发文量
212
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Nature Neuroscience, a multidisciplinary journal, publishes papers of the utmost quality and significance across all realms of neuroscience. The editors welcome contributions spanning molecular, cellular, systems, and cognitive neuroscience, along with psychophysics, computational modeling, and nervous system disorders. While no area is off-limits, studies offering fundamental insights into nervous system function receive priority. The journal offers high visibility to both readers and authors, fostering interdisciplinary communication and accessibility to a broad audience. It maintains high standards of copy editing and production, rigorous peer review, rapid publication, and operates independently from academic societies and other vested interests. In addition to primary research, Nature Neuroscience features news and views, reviews, editorials, commentaries, perspectives, book reviews, and correspondence, aiming to serve as the voice of the global neuroscience community.
期刊最新文献
Deep RNA sequencing of human dorsal root ganglion neurons reveals somatosensory mechanisms Mapping out multiple sclerosis with spatial transcriptomics Cell type mapping reveals tissue niches and interactions in subcortical multiple sclerosis lesions Spatially resolved gene signatures of white matter lesion progression in multiple sclerosis Smelling a concept
×
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:481959085
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