Despite extensive theoretical work on biologically plausible learning rules, clear evidence about whether and how such rules are implemented in the brain has been difficult to obtain. We consider biologically plausible supervised-and reinforcement-learning rules and ask whether changes in network activity during learning can be used to determine which learning rule is being used. Supervised learning requires a credit-assignment model estimating the mapping from neural activity to behavior, and, in a biological organism, this model will inevitably be an imperfect approximation of the ideal mapping, leading to a bias in the direction of the weight updates relative to the true gradient. Reinforcement learning, on the other hand, requires no credit-assignment model and tends to make weight updates following the true gradient direction. We derive a metric to distinguish between learning rules by observing changes in the network activity during learning, given that the mapping from brain to behavior is known by the experimenter. Because brain-machine interface (BMI) experiments allow for precise knowledge of this mapping, we model a cursor-control BMI task using recurrent neural networks, showing that learning rules can be distinguished in simulated experiments using only observations that a neuroscience experimenter would plausibly have access to.

Computational level explanations based on optimal feedback control with signal-dependent noise have been able to account for a vast array of phenomena in human sensorimotor behavior. However, commonly a cost function needs to be assumed for a task and the optimality of human behavior is evaluated by comparing observed and predicted trajectories. Here, we introduce inverse optimal control with signal-dependent noise, which allows inferring the cost function from observed behavior. To do so, we formalize the problem as a partially observable Markov decision process and distinguish between the agent's and the experimenter's inference problems. Specifically, we derive a probabilistic formulation of the evolution of states and belief states and an approximation to the propagation equation in the linear-quadratic Gaussian problem with signal-dependent noise. We extend the model to the case of partial observability of state variables from the point of view of the experimenter. We show the feasibility of the approach through validation on synthetic data and application to experimental data. Our approach enables recovering the costs and benefits implicit in human sequential sensorimotor behavior, thereby reconciling normative and descriptive approaches in a computational framework.

We consider an adaptive experiment for treatment choice and design a minimax and Bayes optimal adaptive experiment with respect to regret. Given binary treatments, the experimenter's goal is to choose the treatment with the highest expected outcome through an adaptive experiment, in order to maximize welfare. We consider adaptive experiments that consist of two phases, the treatment allocation phase and the treatment choice phase. The experiment starts with the treatment allocation phase, where the experimenter allocates treatments to experimental subjects to gather observations. During this phase, the experimenter can adaptively update the allocation probabilities using the observations obtained in the experiment. After the allocation phase, the experimenter proceeds to the treatment choice phase, where one of the treatments is selected as the best. For this adaptive experimental procedure, we propose an adaptive experiment that splits the treatment allocation phase into two stages, where we first estimate the standard deviations and then allocate each treatment proportionally to its standard deviation. We show that this experiment, often referred to as Neyman allocation, is minimax and Bayes optimal in the sense that its regret upper bounds exactly match the lower bounds that we derive. To show this optimality, we derive minimax and Bayes lower bounds for the regret using change-of-measure arguments. Then, we evaluate the corresponding upper bounds using the central limit theorem and large deviation bounds.

As a result, the brain needs to perform these computations in an approximate manner.

As a result, the brain needs to perform these computations in an approximate manner.

Multi-armed bandit problems provide a framework to identify the optimal intervention over a sequence of repeated experiments.

Multi-armed bandit problems provide a framework to identify the optimal intervention over a sequence of repeated experiments.

ActionSense: A Multimodal Dataset and Recording Framework for Human Activities Using Wearable Sensors in a Kitchen Environment