/ Paper arXiv 2611.17011
In short
In shortReport a mistake
Abstract
From the paperThe authors' own words.
Decision making often requires balancing exploitation of familiar options with exploration of uncertain alternatives. One strategy for exploration is random exploration, in which choices become more variable and less tied to the option that currently appears best. However, it remains unclear whether this variability reflects genuine stochasticity or instead a deterministic structure that traditional cognitive models fail to capture. We examined this question using the Horizon Task in an aggregated dataset of 1,392 participants completing over 1,270,695 trials. In this task, exploration becomes more valuable when participants have more future choices, and choice variability increases under longer horizons. We tested whether more expressive neural network models could recover deterministic structure from this additional variability. Although neural networks provided better overall fits to behavior than the traditional model, long-horizon choices remained consistently less predictable than short-horizon choices. These findings show that limited model expressiveness cannot fully account for the increased variability associated with random exploration, suggesting random exploration truly is substantially random.
From the full paper
From the paperCopied from the paper itself by our code.
Reading the paper on arXiv…
Where it fits
The most cited papers it builds on, and the papers that build on it.
/ Builds on 3 most cited
- 2017203.2k citedAttention is All you Need ↗
- 2014175.4k citedAdam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization ↗
- 1997114.1k citedLong Short-Term Memory
/ Built on by None yet
No papers cite it yet. We check again every week.
From Semantic Scholar, updated weekly.
Ask this paper
/ Ask a questionAnswers come from the full paper and name the section
/ Your notes
Select text in the abstract to highlight it or add a note. They stay in this browser.