Abstract
Different learning strategies are thought to fall along a continuum that ranges from simple, inflexible, and fast “model-free” strategies, to more complex, flexible, and deliberative “model-based strategies”. Here we show that, contrary to this proposal, strategies at both ends of this continuum can be equally flexible, effective, and time-intensive. We analyzed behavior of adult human subjects performing a canonical learning task used to distinguish between model-free and model-based strategies. Subjects using either strategy showed similarly high information complexity, a measure of strategic flexibility, and comparable accuracy and response times. This similarity was apparent despite the generally higher computational complexity of model-based algorithms and fundamental differences in how each strategy learned: model-free learning was driven primarily by observed past responses, whereas model-based learning was driven primarily by inferences about latent task features. Thus, model-free and model-based learning differ in the information they use to learn but can support comparably flexible behavior.
Statement of Relevance The distinction between model-free and model-based learning is an influential framework that has been used extensively to understand individual- and task-dependent differences in learning by both healthy and clinical populations. A common interpretation of this distinction that model-based strategies are more complex and therefore more flexible than model-free strategies. However, this interpretation conflates computational complexity, which relates to processing resources and generally higher for model-based algorithms, with information complexity, which reflects flexibility but has rarely been measured. Here we use a metric of information complexity to demonstrate that, contrary to this interpretation, model-free and model-based strategies can be equally flexible, effective, and time-intensive and are better distinguished by the nature of the information from which they learn. Our results counter common interpretations of model-free versus model-based learning and demonstrate the general usefulness of information complexity for assessing different forms of strategic flexibility.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Footnotes
↵* co-senior authors
We have removed the optimality analysis using the information bottleneck as we no longer feel like this analysis is appropriate for this particular task.
