IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1011618.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring strategy differences between humans and monkeys with recurrent neural networks

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Tsuda
  • Barry J Richmond
  • Terrence J Sejnowski

Abstract

Animal models are used to understand principles of human biology. Within cognitive neuroscience, non-human primates are considered the premier model for studying decision-making behaviors in which direct manipulation experiments are still possible. Some prominent studies have brought to light major discrepancies between monkey and human cognition, highlighting problems with unverified extrapolation from monkey to human. Here, we use a parallel model system—artificial neural networks (ANNs)—to investigate a well-established discrepancy identified between monkeys and humans with a working memory task, in which monkeys appear to use a recency-based strategy while humans use a target-selective strategy. We find that ANNs trained on the same task exhibit a progression of behavior from random behavior (untrained) to recency-like behavior (partially trained) and finally to selective behavior (further trained), suggesting monkeys and humans may occupy different points in the same overall learning progression. Surprisingly, what appears to be recency-like behavior in the ANN, is in fact an emergent non-recency-based property of the organization of the neural network’s state space during its development through training. We find that explicit encouragement of recency behavior during training has a dual effect, not only causing an accentuated recency-like behavior, but also speeding up the learning process altogether, resulting in an efficient shaping mechanism to achieve the optimal strategy. Our results suggest a new explanation for the discrepency observed between monkeys and humans and reveal that what can appear to be a recency-based strategy in some cases may not be recency at all.Author summary: How we think our brain solves a task and how it actually does often differ in surprising ways. In this work, we leverage artificial neural network (ANNs) models to study the development and evolution of problem-solving strategies on a working memory task. We show how behaviors arise in the ANNs and progressively evolve, first mimicking monkeys’ behaviors early in the learning process and then progressing to human-like behaviors. Analysis of the neural processing in ANNs reveals a surprising mechanism underlying the behaviors, different than the prevailing theory of how monkeys and humans solve the task and why their performance differs. We discover how repeated experiences mold network activity to generate specific behavioral patterns that account for the variations seen between humans and monkeys. These findings spur deep questions into how different species and artificial neural networks learn and store memory from repeated experience, and how this memory shapes network activity to generate subsequent behaviors.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Tsuda & Barry J Richmond & Terrence J Sejnowski, 2023. "Exploring strategy differences between humans and monkeys with recurrent neural networks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(11), pages 1-29, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1011618
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011618
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011618&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011618?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1011618. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.