Stimulus-Dependent Adjustment of Reward Prediction Error in the Midbrain

Learning does not only depend on rationality, because real-life learning cannot be isolated from emotion or social factors. Therefore, it is intriguing to determine how emotion changes learning, and to identify which neural substrates underlie this interaction. Here, we show that the task-independent presentation of an emotional face before a reward-predicting cue increases the speed of cue-reward association learning in human subjects compared with trials in which a neutral face is presented. This phenomenon was attributable to an increase in the learning rate, which regulates reward prediction errors. Parallel to these behavioral findings, functional magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated that presentation of an emotional face enhanced reward prediction error (RPE) signal in the ventral striatum. In addition, we also found a functional link between this enhanced RPE signal and increased activity in the amygdala following presentation of an emotional face. Thus, this study revealed an acceleration of cue-reward association learning by emotion, and underscored a role of striatum-amygdala interactions in the modulation of the reward prediction errors by emotion.

Depressive episodes experienced in unipolar (UD) and bipolar (BD) disorders are characterized by anhedonia and have been associated with abnormalities in reward processes related to reward valuation and error prediction. It remains however unclear whether these deficits are associated with familial vulnerability to mood disorders. In a functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we evaluated differences in the expected value (EV) and reward prediction error (RPE) signals in ventral striatum (VS) and prefrontal cortex between three groups of monozygotic twins: affected twins in remission for either UD or BD (n = 53), their high-risk unaffected co-twins (n = 34), and low-risk twins with no family history of mood disorders (n = 25). Compared to low-risk twins, affected twins showed lower EV signal bilaterally in the frontal poles and lower RPE signal bilaterally in the VS, left frontal pole and superior frontal gyrus. The high-risk group did not show a significant change in the EV or RPE signals in frontostriatal regions, yet both reward signals were consistently lower compared with low-risk twins in all regions where the affected twins showed significant reductions. Our findings strengthen the notion that reduced valuation of expected rewards and reduced error-dependent reward learning may underpin core symptom of depression such as loss of interest in rewarding activities. The trend reduction in reward-related signals in unaffected co-twins warrants further investigation of this effect in larger samples and prospective follow-up to confirm possible association with increased familial vulnerability to mood disorders.

IntroductionComputational models play an increasingly important role in describing variation in neural activation in human neuroimaging experiments, including evaluating individual differences in the context of psychiatric neuroimaging. In particular, reinforcement learning (RL) techniques have been widely adopted to examine neural responses to reward prediction errors and stimulus or action values, and how these might vary as a function of clinical status. However, there is a lack of consensus around the importance of the precision of free parameter estimation for these methods, particularly with regard to the learning rate. In the present study, I introduce a novel technique which may be used within a general linear model (GLM) to model the effect of mis-estimation of the learning rate on reward prediction error (RPE)-related neural responses.MethodsSimulations employed a simple RL algorithm, which was used to generate hypothetical neural activations that would be expected to be observed in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of RL. Similar RL models were incorporated within a GLM-based analysis method including derivatives, with individual differences in the resulting GLM-derived beta parameters being evaluated with respect to the free parameters of the RL model or being submitted to other validation analyses.ResultsInitial simulations demonstrated that the conventional approach to fitting RL models to RPE responses is more likely to reflect individual differences in a reinforcement efficacy construct (lambda) rather than learning rate (alpha). The proposed method, adding a derivative regressor to the GLM, provides a second regressor which reflects the learning rate. Validation analyses were performed including examining another comparable method which yielded highly similar results, and a demonstration of sensitivity of the method in presence of fMRI-like noise.ConclusionOverall, the findings underscore the importance of the lambda parameter for interpreting individual differences in RPE-coupled neural activity, and validate a novel neural metric of the modulation of such activity by individual differences in the learning rate. The method is expected to find application in understanding aberrant reinforcement learning across different psychiatric patient groups including major depression and substance use disorder.

Reinforcement learning (RL) models have been broadly used in modeling the choice behavior of humans and other animals. In standard RL models, the action values are assumed to be updated according to the reward prediction error (RPE), i.e., the difference between the obtained reward and the expected reward. Numerous studies have noted that the magnitude of the update is biased depending on the sign of the RPE. The bias is represented in RL models by differential learning rates for positive and negative RPEs. However, which aspect of behavioral data that the estimated differential learning rates reflect is not well understood. In this study, we investigate how the differential learning rates influence the statistical properties of choice behavior (i.e., the relation between past experiences and the current choice) based on theoretical considerations and numerical simulations. We clarify that when the learning rates differ, the impact of a past outcome depends on the subsequent outcomes, in contrast to standard RL models with symmetric value updates. Based on the results, we propose a model-neutral statistical test to validate the hypothesis that value updates are asymmetric. The asymmetry in the value updates induces the autocorrelation of choice (i.e., the tendency to repeat the same choice or to switch the choice irrespective of past rewards). Conversely, if an RL model without an intrinsic autocorrelation factor is fitted to data that possess an intrinsic autocorrelation, a statistical bias to overestimate the difference in learning rates arises. We demonstrate that this bias can cause a statistical artifact in RL-model fitting leading to a “pseudo-positivity bias” and a “pseudo-confirmation bias.”

Learning occurs when an outcome deviates from expectation (prediction error). According to formal learning theory, the defining paradigm demonstrating the role of prediction errors in learning is the blocking test. Here, a novel stimulus is blocked from learning when it is associated with a fully predicted outcome, presumably because the occurrence of the outcome fails to produce a prediction error. We investigated the role of prediction errors in human reward-directed learning using a blocking paradigm and measured brain activation with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Participants showed blocking of behavioral learning with juice rewards as predicted by learning theory. The medial orbitofrontal cortex and the ventral putamen showed significantly lower responses to blocked, compared with nonblocked, reward-predicting stimuli. In reward-predicting control situations, deactivations in orbitofrontal cortex and ventral putamen occurred at the time of unpredicted reward omissions. Responses in discrete parts of orbitofrontal cortex correlated with the degree of behavioral learning during, and after, the learning phase. These data suggest that learning in primary reward structures in the human brain correlates with prediction errors in a manner that complies with principles of formal learning theory.

Can the apparent adaptation of dopamine neurons’ mismatch sensitivities be reconciled with their computation of reward prediction errors?

The temporal difference learning (TDL) algorithm has been essential to conceptualizing the role of dopamine in reinforcement learning (RL). Despite its theoretical importance, it remains unknown whether a neuronal implementation of this algorithm exists in the brain. Here, we provide an interpretation of the recently described signaling properties of ventral tegmental area (VTA) GABAergic neurons and show that a circuitry of these neurons implements the TDL algorithm. Specifically, we identified the neuronal mechanism of three key components of the TDL model: a sustained state value signal encoded by an afferent input to the VTA, a temporal differentiation circuit formed by two types of VTA GABAergic neurons the combined output of which computes momentary reward prediction (RP) as the derivative of the state value, and the computation of reward prediction errors (RPEs) in dopamine neurons utilizing the output of the differentiation circuit. Using computational methods, we also show that this mechanism is optimally adapted to the biophysics of RPE signaling in dopamine neurons, mechanistically links the emergence of conditioned reinforcement to RP, and can naturally account for the temporal discounting of reinforcement. Elucidating the implementation of the TDL algorithm may further the investigation of RL in biological and artificial systems.

Dopamine is thought to provide reward prediction errors signals to temporal lobe memory systems, but their role in episodic memory has not been fully characterized. We developed an incidental memory paradigm to 1) estimate the influence of reward prediction errors on formation of episodic memories, 2) dissociate this influence from surprise and uncertainty, 3) characterize the role of temporal correspondence between prediction error and memoranda presentation, and 4) determine the extent to which this influence is consolidation-dependent. We found that people encoded incidental memoranda more strongly when they gambled for potential rewards. Moreover, this strengthened encoding scaled with the reward prediction error experienced when memoranda were presented (and not before or after). This encoding enhancement was detectable within minutes and did not differ substantially after twenty-four hours, indicating that it is not consolidation-dependent. These results suggest a computationally and temporally specific role for reward prediction error signaling in memory formation.

The question of how the brain represents reward prediction errors is central to reinforcement learning and adaptive, goal-directed behavior. Previous studies have revealed prediction error representations in multiple electrophysiological signatures, but it remains elusive whether these electrophysiological correlates underlying prediction errors are sensitive to valence (in a signed form) or to salience (in an unsigned form). One possible reason concerns the loose correspondence between objective probability and subjective prediction resulting from the optimistic bias, that is, the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of encountering positive future events. In the present electroencephalography (EEG) study, we approached this question by directly measuring participants' idiosyncratic, trial-to-trial prediction errors elicited by subjective and objective probabilities across two experiments. We adopted monetary gain and loss feedback in Experiment 1 and positive and negative feedback as communicated by the same zero-value feedback in Experiment 2. We provided electrophysiological evidence in time and time-frequency domains supporting both reward and salience prediction error signals. Moreover, we showed that these electrophysiological signatures were highly flexible and sensitive to an optimistic bias and various forms of salience. Our findings shed new light on multiple presentations of prediction error in the human brain, which differ in format and functional role.

Attributing outcomes to your own actions or to external causes is essential for appropriately learning which actions lead to reward and which actions do not. Our previous work showed that this type of credit assignment is best explained by a Bayesian reinforcement learning model which posits that beliefs about the causal structure of the environment modulate reward prediction errors (RPEs) during action value updating. In this study, we investigated the brain networks underlying reinforcement learning that are influenced by causal beliefs using functional magnetic resonance imaging while human participants (n = 31; 13 males, 18 females) completed a behavioral task that manipulated beliefs about causal structure. We found evidence that RPEs modulated by causal beliefs are represented in dorsal striatum, while standard (unmodulated) RPEs are represented in ventral striatum. Further analyses revealed that beliefs about causal structure are represented in anterior insula and inferior frontal gyrus. Finally, structural equation modeling revealed effective connectivity from anterior insula to dorsal striatum. Together, these results are consistent with a possible neural architecture in which causal beliefs in anterior insula are integrated with prediction error signals in dorsal striatum to update action values.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Learning which actions lead to reward-a process known as reinforcement learning-is essential for survival. Inferring the causes of observed outcomes-a process known as causal inference-is crucial for appropriately assigning credit to one's own actions and restricting learning to effective action-outcome contingencies. Previous studies have linked reinforcement learning to the striatum, and causal inference to prefrontal regions, yet how these neural processes interact to guide adaptive behavior remains poorly understood. Here, we found evidence that causal beliefs represented in the prefrontal cortex modulate action value updating in posterior striatum, separately from the unmodulated action value update in ventral striatum posited by standard reinforcement learning models.

The phasic firing of dopamine neurons has been theorized to encode a reward-prediction error as formalized by the temporal-difference (TD) algorithm in reinforcement learning. Most TD models of dopamine have assumed a stimulus representation, known as the complete serial compound, in which each moment in a trial is distinctly represented. We introduce a more realistic temporal stimulus representation for the TD model. In our model, all external stimuli, including rewards, spawn a series of internal microstimuli, which grow weaker and more diffuse over time. These microstimuli are used by the TD learning algorithm to generate predictions of future reward. This new stimulus representation injects temporal generalization into the TD model and enhances correspondence between model and data in several experiments, including those when rewards are omitted or received early. This improved fit mostly derives from the absence of large negative errors in the new model, suggesting that dopamine alone can encode the full range of TD errors in these situations.

Reward learning depends on accurate reward associations with potential choices. These associations can be attained with reinforcement learning mechanisms using a reward prediction error (RPE) signal (the difference between actual and expected rewards) for updating future reward expectations. Despite an extensive body of literature on the influence of RPE on learning, little has been done to investigate the potentially separate contributions of RPE valence (positive or negative) and surprise (absolute degree of deviation from expectations). Here, we coupled single-trial electroencephalography with simultaneously acquired fMRI, during a probabilistic reversal-learning task, to offer evidence of temporally overlapping but largely distinct spatial representations of RPE valence and surprise. Electrophysiological variability in RPE valence correlated with activity in regions of the human reward network promoting approach or avoidance learning. Electrophysiological variability in RPE surprise correlated primarily with activity in regions of the human attentional network controlling the speed of learning. Crucially, despite the largely separate spatial extend of these representations our EEG-informed fMRI approach uniquely revealed a linear superposition of the two RPE components in a smaller network encompassing visuo-mnemonic and reward areas. Activity in this network was further predictive of stimulus value updating indicating a comparable contribution of both signals to reward learning.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a dominant paradigm for understanding animal behaviors and neural correlates of decision-making, in part because of its ability to explain Pavlovian conditioned behaviors and the role of midbrain dopamine activity as reward prediction error (RPE). However, recent experimental findings indicate that dopamine activity, contrary to the RL hypothesis, may not signal RPE and differs based on the type of Pavlovian response (e.g. sign- and goal-tracking responses). In this study, we address this discrepancy by introducing a new neural correlate for learning reward predictions; the correlate is called “cue-evoked reward”. It refers to a recall of reward evoked by the cue that is learned through simple cue-reward associations. We introduce a temporal difference learning model, in which neural correlates of the cue itself and cue-evoked reward underlie learning of reward predictions. The animal's reward prediction supported by these two correlates is divided into sign and goal components respectively. We relate the sign and goal components to approach responses towards the cue (i.e. sign-tracking) and the food-tray (i.e. goal-tracking) respectively. We found a number of correspondences between simulated models and the experimental findings (i.e. behavior and neural responses). First, the development of modeled responses is consistent with those observed in the experimental task. Second, the model's RPEs were similar to dopamine activity in respective response groups. Finally, goal-tracking, but not sign-tracking, responses rapidly emerged when RPE was restored in the simulated models, similar to experiments with recovery from dopamine-antagonist. These results suggest two complementary neural correlates, corresponding to the cue and its evoked reward, form the basis for learning reward predictions in the sign- and goal-tracking rats.

Reinforcement learning: computing the temporal difference of values via distinct corticostriatal pathways

In contemporary reinforcement learning models, reward prediction error (RPE), the difference between the expected and actual reward, is thought to guide action value learning through the firing activity of dopaminergic neurons. Given the importance of dopamine in reward learning and the involvement of Akt1 in dopamine-dependent behaviors, the aim of this study was to investigate whether Akt1 deficiency modulates reward learning and the magnitude of RPE using Akt1 mutant mice as a model. In comparison to wild-type littermate controls, the expression of Akt1 proteins in mouse brains occurred in a gene-dosage-dependent manner and Akt1 heterozygous (HET) mice exhibited impaired striatal Akt1 activity under methamphetamine challenge. No genotypic difference was found in the basal levels of dopamine and its metabolites. In a series of reward-related learning tasks, HET mice displayed a relatively efficient method of updating reward information from the environment during the acquisition phase of the two natural reward tasks and in the reverse section of the dynamic foraging T-maze but not in methamphetamine-induced or aversive-related reward learning. The implementation of a standard reinforcement learning model and the Bayesian hierarchical parameter estimation show that HET mice have higher RPE magnitudes and that their action values are updated more rapidly among all three test sections in T-maze. These results indicate that Akt1 deficiency modulates natural reward learning and RPE. This study showed a promising avenue for investigating RPE in mutant mice and provided evidence for the potential link from genetic deficiency, to neurobiological abnormalities, to impairment in higher-order cognitive functioning.