Papers › Recovering Quantitative Models of Human Information Processing with Differentiable...

Recovering Quantitative Models of Human Information Processing with Differentiable Architecture Search

25 Mar 2021arXiv:2103.13939archive 2025-07-28

Sebastian Musslick

The integration of behavioral phenomena into mechanistic models of cognitive function is a fundamental staple of cognitive science. Yet, researchers are beginning to accumulate increasing amounts of data without having the temporal or monetary resources to integrate these data into scientific theories. We seek to overcome these limitations by incorporating existing machine learning techniques into an open-source pipeline for the automated construction of quantitative models. This pipeline leverages the use of neural architecture search to automate the discovery of interpretable model architectures, and automatic differentiation to automate the fitting of model parameters to data. We evaluate the utility of these methods based on their ability to recover quantitative models of human information processing from synthetic data. We find that these methods are capable of recovering basic quantitative motifs from models of psychophysics, learning and decision making. We also highlight weaknesses of this framework and discuss future directions for their mitigation.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

musslick/DARTS-Cognitive-Modeling officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Decision MakingNeural Architecture Search

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections