↓ Skip to main content

Spike-based Decision Learning of Nash Equilibria in Two-Player Games

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Spike-based Decision Learning of Nash Equilibria in Two-Player Games
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002691
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johannes Friedrich, Walter Senn

Abstract

Humans and animals face decision tasks in an uncertain multi-agent environment where an agent's strategy may change in time due to the co-adaptation of others strategies. The neuronal substrate and the computational algorithms underlying such adaptive decision making, however, is largely unknown. We propose a population coding model of spiking neurons with a policy gradient procedure that successfully acquires optimal strategies for classical game-theoretical tasks. The suggested population reinforcement learning reproduces data from human behavioral experiments for the blackjack and the inspector game. It performs optimally according to a pure (deterministic) and mixed (stochastic) Nash equilibrium, respectively. In contrast, temporal-difference(TD)-learning, covariance-learning, and basic reinforcement learning fail to perform optimally for the stochastic strategy. Spike-based population reinforcement learning, shown to follow the stochastic reward gradient, is therefore a viable candidate to explain automated decision learning of a Nash equilibrium in two-player games.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 5%
Japan 2 3%
France 2 3%
Switzerland 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 53 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Researcher 13 21%
Professor 9 14%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 24%
Computer Science 11 17%
Neuroscience 8 13%
Psychology 6 10%
Physics and Astronomy 5 8%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 8 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2012.
All research outputs
#14,615,224
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,134
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,185
of 191,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#60
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 191,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.