ArticleeLife2025
Individual differences in tail risk sensitive exploration using Bayes-adaptive Markov decision processes.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Fleeing is believing: adaptive behavior under social threat as an inference process.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2026Article
- Success-efficient/failure-safe strategy for hierarchical reinforcement motor learning.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Novelty is a double-edged sword for agents and animals alike: they might benefit from untapped resources or face unexpected costs or dangers such as predation. The conventional exploration/exploitation tradeoff is thus colored by risk sensitivity. A wealth of experiments has shown how animals solve this dilemma, for example, using intermittent approach. However, there are large individual differences in the nature of approach, and modeling has yet to elucidate how this might be based on animals' differing prior expectations about reward and threat, and differing degrees of risk aversion. To capture these factors, we built a Bayes-adaptive Markov decision process model with three key components: an adaptive hazard function capturing potential predation, an intrinsic reward function providing the urge to explore, and a conditional value at risk (CVaR) objective, which is a contemporary measure of trait risk sensitivity. We fit this model to a coarse-grain abstraction of the behavior of 26 animals who freely explored a novel object in an open-field arena. We show that the model captures both quantitative (frequency, duration of exploratory bouts) and qualitative (with distinguished, cautious, tail-behind approach) features of behavior, including the substantial idiosyncrasies that were observed. Some animals begin with cautious exploration and quickly transition to a confident approach to maximize exploration for reward; we classify them as potentially more risk neutral and enjoying a flexible hazard prior. By contrast, other animals only ever approach in a cautious manner and display a form of self-censoring; they are characterized by potential risk aversion and high and inflexible hazard priors. Explaining risk-sensitive exploration using factorized parameters of reinforcement learning models could aid in the understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of psychiatric abnormalities such as anxiety disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.