Daniel E. Acuna

Future impact: Predicting scientific success

Daniel E. Acuna, Stefano Allesina and Konrad P. Kording present a formula to estimate the future h-index of life scientists.

Using psychophysics to ask if the brain samples or maximizes

The two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) task is the workhorse of psychophysics and is used to measure the just-noticeable difference, generally assumed to accurately quantify sensory precision. However, this assumption is not true for all mechanisms of decision making. Here we derive the behavioral predictions for two popular mechanisms, sampling and maximum a posteriori, and examine how they affect the outcome of the 2AFC task. These predictions are used in a combined visual 2AFC and estimation experiment. Our results strongly suggest that subjects use a maximum a posteriori mechanism. Further, our derivations and experimental paradigm establish the already standard 2AFC task as a behavioral tool for measuring how humans make decisions under uncertainty.

Structure Learning in Human Sequential Decision-Making

Studies of sequential decision-making in humans frequently find suboptimal performance relative to an ideal actor that has perfect knowledge of the model of how rewards and events are generated in the environment. Rather than being suboptimal, we argue that the learning problem humans face is more complex, in that it also involves learning the structure of reward generation in the environment. We formulate the problem of structure learning in sequential decision tasks using Bayesian reinforcement learning, and show that learning the generative model for rewards qualitatively changes the behavior of an optimal learning agent. To test whether people exhibit structure learning, we performed experiments involving a mixture of one-armed and two-armed bandit reward models, where structure learning produces many of the qualitative behaviors deemed suboptimal in previous studies. Our results demonstrate humans can perform structure learning in a near-optimal manner.

Toward Perceiving Robots as Humans: Three Handshake Models Face the Turing-Like Handshake Test

In the Turing test a computer model is deemed to “think intelligently” if it can generate answers that are indistinguishable from those of a human. We developed an analogous Turing-like handshake test to determine if a machine can produce similarly indistinguishable movements. The test is administered through a telerobotic system in which an interrogator holds a robotic stylus and interacts with another party - artificial or human with varying levels of noise. The interrogator is asked which party seems to be more human. Here, we compare the human-likeness levels of three different models for handshake: (1) Tit-for-Tat model, (2) λ model, and (3) Machine Learning model. The Tit-for-Tat and the Machine Learning models generated handshakes that were perceived as the most human-like among the three models that were tested. Combining the best aspects of each of the three models into a single robotic handshake algorithm might allow us to advance our understanding of the way the nervous system controls sensorimotor interactions and further improve the human-likeness of robotic handshakes.

Predicting scientific success

Daniel E. Acuna, Stefano Allesina and Konrad P. Kording present a formula to estimate the future h-index of life scientists.

Multifaceted aspects of chunking enable robust algorithms

Sequence production tasks are a standard tool to analyze motor learning, consolidation, and habituation. As sequences are learned, movements are typically grouped into subsets or chunks. For example, most Americans memorize telephone numbers in two chunks of three digits, and one chunk of four. Studies generally use response times or error rates to estimate how subjects chunk, and these estimates are often related to physiological data. Here we show that chunking is simultaneously reflected in reaction times, errors, and their correlations. This multimodal structure enables us to propose a Bayesian algorithm that better estimates chunks while avoiding overfitting. Our algorithm reveals previously unknown behavioral structure, such as an increased error correlations with training, and promises a useful tool for the characterization of many forms of sequential motor behavior.

Chunking as the result of an efficiency computation trade-off

How to move efficiently is an optimal control problem, whose computational complexity grows exponentially with the horizon of the planned trajectory. Breaking a compound movement into a series of chunks, each planned over a shorter horizon can thus reduce the overall computational complexity and associated costs while limiting the achievable efficiency. This trade-off suggests a cost-effective learning strategy: to learn new movements we should start with many short chunks (to limit the cost of computation). As practice reduces the impediments to more complex computation, the chunking structure should evolve to allow progressively more efficient movements (to maximize efficiency). Here we show that monkeys learning a reaching sequence over an extended period of time adopt this strategy by performing movements that can be described as locally optimal trajectories. Chunking can thus be understood as a cost-effective strategy for producing and learning efficient movements.

Science Concierge: A Fast Content-Based Recommendation System for Scientific Publications.

Finding relevant publications is important for scientists who have to cope with exponentially increasing numbers of scholarly material. Algorithms can help with this task as they help for music, movie, and product recommendations. However, we know little about the performance of these algorithms with scholarly material. Here, we develop an algorithm, and an accompanying Python library, that implements a recommendation system based on the content of articles. Design principles are to adapt to new content, provide near-real time suggestions, and be open source. We tested the library on 15K posters from the Society of Neuroscience Conference 2015. Human curated topics are used to cross validate parameters in the algorithm and produce a similarity metric that maximally correlates with human judgments. We show that our algorithm significantly outperformed suggestions based on keywords. The work presented here promises to make the exploration of scholarly material faster and more accurate.

The future h-index is an excellent way to predict scientists' future impact

Articles you may be interested in Quantitative assessment of scientific quality AIP Conf.

Point/Counterpoint. The future h-index is an excellent way to predict scientists' future impact.

Articles you may be interested in Quantitative assessment of scientific quality AIP Conf.