3
$\begingroup$

I am conducting biological research on animal behavior. There is an arena set up like a binary tree. End nodes are sources of food (e.g. smells) or stimuli that can mix. The animal (or a group of animals) enters an arena from the top, and navigates and makes choices based on the stimuli that reach it, always making a binary choice at each node, until it reaches the lowest node. The animal at first finds itself in a complex mixture, and at each fork makes a choice between simpler mixtures. A visual aide:

enter image description here

The arena size (binary tree height) is not specified yet, it will be around 2, 3 or 4. The idea is to understand or disambiguate the contribution of each of the smells by which choice an animal makes, at every fork of the tree, and where it ends up eventually. The end nodes will be randomized repeatedly and information will be collected about the choices an individual or group of animals make within this arena multiple times.

Question: what kind of statistics or math or tools can be used to understand the 'weight' or contribution of each end node to the observed animal choices? It seems to me the design of the experiment allows for several mathematical/statistical approaches. Unfortunately I do not know where to begin or what to even describe this problem as to learn more about it.

$\endgroup$
10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Are there any limitations on your sample size? Naively, with enough data you could just look at conditional probabilities e.g. probability the animal choose A given A and B are mixed at level 2. Additionally, will you be using the same animals from run to run? $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 20, 2021 at 13:54
  • $\begingroup$ I think you must be interested in synergistic effects (e.g. the effect of A&B is greater than A + B) or antagonism (A&B has less attraction than A or B alone). So, you would be looking at interaction effects. Otherwise, pairing each grouping in a simple olfactometer would be the straightforward way to go. $\endgroup$
    – Dan Slone
    Commented Apr 20, 2021 at 14:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think @DemetriPananos is onto something. Conditional probabilities might get you far here and you could either calculate them by hand, or describe the experiment as a Bayesian Network and estimate them using pomegranate (Python, free), bnlearn (R, free), or AgentaRisk (GUI, paid). $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 20, 2021 at 14:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ First: thank you so very much! Great comments. Conditional probabilities and Bayesian network approach seems to fit, will look into it further too. I am heavily interested in interaction effects as @Dan Slone mentions. Can these be accounted for with conditional probabilities or Bayesian network analysis? As for limitations... no, I am NOT using the same animal from run-to-run (they are independent tests) and there are no major sample size limitations in my opinion. Say n=30 animals for each arena, so every tree (node permutation) would consist of 30 trials using single animals. More possible! $\endgroup$
    – S Pr
    Commented Apr 21, 2021 at 10:36
  • $\begingroup$ Still thinking about this @S Pr .... are you expecting that the subject will end up in one of the lowest levels every time, or could they stay in any of the chambers? That would greatly influence the analysis. Assuming there will be a time limit for the final determination. Alternatively you could also mark the time they take to travel from node to node, but that would be much more complicated. $\endgroup$
    – Dan Slone
    Commented Apr 23, 2021 at 3:15

1 Answer 1

6
+50
$\begingroup$

Thanks to Jake Westfall for alerting me of this question. It does indeed sound like something that could be modelled with a multinomial processing tree (MPT) models.

The experiment in your figure would provide a you with a multinomial distribution with four categories ($C_A, C_B, C_C, C_D)$, which provides three independent data points (i.e., maximum parameters). A simple saturated MPT model for the categories could be:

$ Pr(C_{A}) = m_{A,B}*t_A\\ Pr(C_{B}) = m_{A,B}*(1 - t_A)\\ Pr(C_{C}) = (1- m_{A,B})*t_C\\ Pr(C_{D}) = (1- m_{A,B})*(1 - t_C) $

As in any MPT model, the parameter represent (conditional) probabilities that a certain event occurs. Here the three parameters are:

  • $m_{A,B}:$ do animals choose the A & B mix over the C & D mix?
  • $t_A:$ do animals choose the A over B?
  • $t_C:$ do animals choose the C over D?

In a typical MPT task, you would have other trees that share the same parameters. That allows you to fit a non-saturated model which provides some information whether the overall model and its assumption fits the data.

However, in the present example there are four different and apparently unique stimuli. So sharing parameters across trees might not be easily be possible. One possibility might be to consider a baseline stimuli. For example, consider that stimuli B and D are the same. Then you could consider other experiments/trees in which A & B also occurs in one tree, but you have a different comparison in the other branch, say E and B. This tree would now share the same $t_A$ parameter as the tree you have, but all other parameters are different. This would allow you to estimate the various probabilities while allowing to test if the assumption that say $t_A$ is the same across tasks holds.

Also, once you have specified the model equations as shown in the example, their exists easy to use software tools to fit such models, TreeBUGS, which even allows for a hierarchical Bayesian approach allowing for one random-effects term such as animal. They also have a good introductory paper: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/TreeBUGS/vignettes/Heck_2018_BRM.pdf

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much, especially for the paper detailing TreeBUGS that I'll have to devote some time to. And apologies for my ignorance, I hope I can clarify the answer precisely for myself: do you mean that some stimuli must be common between different sub-trees? For example, if one tree fork includes A&B, and another forks C&D, the modeling can only be performed when e.g. A and C are the same? It cannot proceed without this commonality between the sub-trees, correct? And separately, would something like MPT models work if all stimuli (A, B, C and D) shared a common background stimulus? $\endgroup$
    – S Pr
    Commented Apr 27, 2021 at 10:21
  • $\begingroup$ One problem is that the meaning of a parameter always needs to be fixed across trees. So if you have a parameter $t_A$ that encodes the (conditional) probability to choose A over B, it always needs to mean choosing A over B (and cannot mean choosing A over F in another tree). Thus, this parameter can only appear in a tree that offers this choice. And if all stimuli always have the same background stimulus, this is of course possible (as this is in some sense always the case). I hope this answers your questions. $\endgroup$
    – Henrik
    Commented Apr 27, 2021 at 14:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.