title: Characterizing learning by simultaneous analysis of continuous and binary measures of performance.
abstract: Continuous observations, such as reaction and run times, and binary observations, such as correct/incorrect responses, are recorded routinely in behavioral learning experiments. Although both types of performance measures are often recorded simultaneously, the two have not been used in combination to evaluate learning. We present a state-space model of learning in which the observation process has simultaneously recorded continuous and binary measures of performance. We use these performance measures simultaneously to estimate the model parameters and the unobserved cognitive state process by maximum likelihood using an approximate expectation maximization (EM) algorithm. We introduce the concept of a reaction-time curve and reformulate our previous definitions of the learning curve, the ideal observer curve, the learning trial and between-trial comparisons of performance in terms of the new model. We illustrate the properties of the new model in an analysis of a simulated learning experiment. In the simulated data analysis, simultaneous use of the two measures of performance provided more credible and accurate estimates of the learning than either measure analyzed separately. We also analyze two actual learning experiments in which the performance of rats and of monkeys was tracked across trials by simultaneously recorded reaction and run times and the correct and incorrect responses. In the analysis of the actual experiments, our algorithm gave a straightforward, efficient way to characterize learning by combining continuous and binary measures of performance. This analysis paradigm has implications for characterizing learning and for the more general problem of combining different data types to characterize the properties of a neural system.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2696, USA.
authors.forename: M J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Prerau
authors.forename: A C
authors.initials: AC
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Uri T
authors.initials: UT
authors.lastname: Eden
authors.forename: Y
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Kubota
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Yanike
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Suzuki
authors.forename: A M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Graybiel
authors.forename: E N
authors.initials: EN
authors.lastname: Brown
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D000818:Animals; D001245:Association Learning; D003071:Cognition; D003198:Computer Simulation; D000882:Haplorhini; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D008959:Models, Neurological; D017711:Nonlinear Dynamics; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011336:Probability; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2005 Jun 15;25(24):5720-9
references.pmid: 15958738
references.citation: Hippocampus. 1999;9(2):101-17
references.pmid: 10226772
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2004 Jan 14;24(2):447-61
references.pmid: 14724243
references.citation: Science. 2003 Jun 6;300(5625):1578-81
references.pmid: 12791995
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2007 Mar;97(3):2516-24
references.pmid: 17182907
references.citation: Science. 1999 Nov 26;286(5445):1745-9
references.pmid: 10576743
references.citation: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2007 Mar;54(3):419-28
references.pmid: 17355053
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2003 Jan 15;23(2):676-81
references.pmid: 12533627
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):550-92
references.pmid: 11488378
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Sep 7;101(36):13124-31
references.pmid: 15331782
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1991 Dec;105(6):787-97
references.pmid: 1777102
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2008 Sep 1;42(3):1069-77
references.pmid: 18602485
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Jul 13;442(7099):164-71
references.pmid: 16838014
references.citation: Neural Comput. 2003 May;15(5):965-91
references.pmid: 12803953
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Jul 21;95(15):8945-50
references.pmid: 9671784
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1997 Dec 1;17(23):9285-97
references.pmid: 9364074
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2006 Apr;9(4):562-8
references.pmid: 16501567
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2005 Mar;93(3):1776-92
references.pmid: 15456798
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jun 24;94(13):7109-14
references.pmid: 9192700
references.citation: PLoS Biol. 2006 Jun;4(6):e179
references.pmid: 16700627
references.citation: Nature. 2005 Oct 20;437(7062):1158-61
references.pmid: 16237445
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 2003 Aug;117(4):728-37
references.pmid: 12931958
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Mar 13;98(6):3543-8
references.pmid: 11248114
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2002 Jul;109(3):533-44
references.pmid: 12088244
references.citation: Biol Cybern. 2008 Jul;99(1):1-14
references.pmid: 18438683
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1993 Feb;107(1):72-81
references.pmid: 8447959
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2007 Oct;98(4):2456-75
references.pmid: 17522167