750 likes | 1.56k Views
Today. Finish off the material from last week!Introduce a formal learning model: the Rescorla-Wagner modelWork through some predictions of the modelExamine the successes of the model. Overshadowing. Pavlov (1927) p 270?In one dog a compound simultaneous conditioned stimulus consisted of a tacti
E N D
1. Contemporary Learning Theory Dr Pam Blundell
Lecture Three
2. Today Finish off the material from last week!
Introduce a formal learning model: the Rescorla-Wagner model
Work through some predictions of the model
Examine the successes of the model
3. Overshadowing Pavlov (1927) p 270
In one dog a compound simultaneous conditioned stimulus consisted of a tactile and an auditory component, the auditory being considerably weakened. The compound stimulus, when well established, gave 4-4.5 drops of saliva during 20 seconds isolated action. When used separately the auditory component gave a secretion of 1-1.5 drops and the tactile 2.5-5 drops
4. Overshadowing Mackintosh (1976)
Conditioned suppression procedure effects of conditioning with two stimuli
N+, N+, NL+, NL+, L+
5. Mackintosh 1976
6. Mackintosh 1976 Both Noise and Noise-light compound are well learned about
What has been learned about the light (compared with group L+)
8. Mackintosh 1976 Loud noise overshadows learning about the light
10. Mackintosh 1976 Light doesnt overshadow learning about the loud noise
Light does overshadow learning about the less loud noise
The more salient an element is, the more it is learned about.
11. Conditioning depends on
Contingency between CS and US
Reinforcement probability
Temporal relationships
Biological relevance of CS and US
Which other stimuli are present during conditioning
12. Blocking Kamin 1960s
Does past learning alter new learning?
15. Blocking Conditioning with a previously trained CS blocks new learning
A fully predicted CS cannot be learned about
16. Conditioning depends on
Contingency between CS and US
Reinforcement probability
Temporal relationships
Biological relevance of CS and US
Which other stimuli are present during conditioning
How surprising the US is
17. Pavlovian conditioning: What is learnt? The most popular and widely accepted hypothesis is that during conditioning some associations get established between the elements of the task.
Associative learning theory assumes a conceptual nervous system consisting of a set of representational nodes connected by associative links.
These nodes can be activated by direct application of the relevant stimulus, and also by way of excitatory associative links when these have been established by prior training
18. What is learnt?
19. Pavlovian conditioning
20. CS could become associated with the response
Occurrence of US might reinforce this association (law of effect)
21. CS becomes associated with the US
Would mean that US identity is know to the animal
22. S-R theory CR resembles the UR
But it seems unlikely that the animal doesnt know the identity of the US?
23. Holland & Straub 1979
24. Holland & Straub 1979 If animals know the identity of the US, they should show fewer appetitive CRs to the noise in group E than in group C
26. Dwyer 2005 Conditioned taste preferences
Presented flavour A in compound with sucrose, flavour B in compound with maltodextrin (carbohydrate), flavour C alone
Animals susequently preferred both A and B over C, which had been presented alone
(A, B & C were grape, cherry, or tangerine Kool Aid, counterbalenced)
27. Dwyer 2005 Two bottle test
Drink more CS+ (A/B) than CS-(C)
28. Dwyer 2005 Palatability can be conditioned but what is learnt?
Devalue each US in turn, by sensory specific satiety
Compare consumption of tastes
If animals learn about specific reinforcer identity, will prefer the taste paired with the still valued reinforcer
29. Rats do learn about the specific reinforcers, not simply that a taste is nice
30. Summary Excitatory conditioning
CS-> US; CS-> CR
Compare excitatory and inhibitory conditioning
Inhibitory: CS-> !US; CS ?behaviour
The nature of associative conditioning
Discrete CSs, USs,
The conditions necessary for learning
Contingency, contiguity, predictive value,
31. Objectives At the end of this lecture, students should be able to:
Evaluate the Rescorla-Wagner model
Make unique predictions using the Rescorla-Wagner model
32. Reading Rescorla, R.A. & Wagner, A.R. (1972): A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. Black and W.F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical Conditioning II: Current research and theory (64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
Dickinson p123 - 134
Pearce Ch 3 (part 1)
Journal articles!
33. Formal models of associative learning Must be able to account for the conditions necessary for learning
Must be falsifiable
34. Common assumptions Behaviour exhibited by the animal depends upon the strength of an association between a CS and a US (V)
High associative strength = Strong CR
Low associative strength = Weak CR
35. A simple model CS paired with a US
Need to compute the change in associative strength (?V)
?V= a ß ?
a: level of activation of the CS node
?: level of activation of the US node
ß: learning rate parameter
36. In this model Need both CS and US to be activated for learning to occur
Need to assume that activity in a node will continue for some time after the stimulus presentation, to account for learning
37. A simple model Consider if a=0.5, ß =0.5, ?=1
38. Successes of the simple model V increases with each trial
Sensitive to different levels of activation of CS and US
39. Failures of the simple model No shape to the learning curve
No asymptote
40. A less simple model ?V= a ß(?-V)
41. The less simple model Produces a learning curve, with an asymptote (V= ?)
Have to assume activity in the nodes persists following presentation of the stimuli
Does this model account for all data?
42. Blocking Recall:
43. Blocking Assume N and L nodes are equally activated by presentation of each stimulus, such that aN=aL=0.5
Assume ?=1
44. Group G V-L at asymptote is 0.87
45. Group B At asymptote, VL is 0.87
46. Failure of the model Doesnt account for the blocking effect
Need to incorporate how suprising the US is
Rescorla-Wagner model (1972)
?V= a ß(?-?V)
47. Group B
48. Overshadowing Consider Mackintosh (1976)
Compare learning about L and NL
aN=0.8; aL=.2
Assume ?=1
50. Successes of the R-W model Learning curve
Extinction curve
Generalisation
Discrimination
Conditioned inhibition
Blocking
unblocking
overshadowing
51. Extinction
52. Generalisation If two stimuli are similar, animals will generalise their responding from one CS to the novel (but similar) CS.
Can be accounted for within R-W model by assuming that the stimuli comprise elements AX and BX.
If AX+, then when presented with BX, some associative strength activated by X.
53. Discrimination Learning to discriminate between two similar stimuli
AX+ BX-
55. Conditioned inhibition Rescorla-Wagner model assumes that if a CS is a conditioned inhibitor, then it has a negative associative strength
Consider Zimmer-Hart & Rescorla (1974 see last lecture)
Tone+/ToneLight-
57. Retardation test CI undergoes new conditioning
Should be slower to acquire learning than a neutral CS
59. Summation test Performance is governed by the total V present on any trial
CI has negative V so will always transfer to a novel compound
60. A unique prediction of R-W model Blocking with a reduced CS
X++
AX+
R-W model predicts A should become an inhibitor
(simulate with ?++=1, ?+=0.5)
62. Le Pelley, Oakeshott & McLaren (2005)
64. Summary Importance of surprise in learning
Formal model encapsulating this:
Rescorla-Wagner model
How to apply the Rescorla Wagner model
Evaluation of its unique predictions