How the dynamic interplay of cortico-basal ganglia-thalamic pathways shapes the time course of deliberation and commitment
Fig 3
CLAW (Circuit Logic Assessed via Walks) diagram for CBGT network dynamics.
(A) CLAW diagram. Bold numbers in boxes indicate the network states, and the transition probability from a current state to a subsequent state is indicated by the number near the arrow pointing from the current state. The numbers below certain states (e.g., “0.82 end” below state 663) represent the probability that if these states are reached, then they are the final states prior to decisions. (B) Overall decision time distribution across 300 networks, categorized into three equal-count tertiles defining fast (left), intermediate (middle), and slow (right) networks, demarcated by vertical dashed black lines. The coloring of each CLAW state in panel A corresponds to the mean DT for all trials that visit this state, following the same color-coding scheme as in panel B. (C) Details of the states. A complete explanation of the full set of state properties, including those related to the right choice, is presented in the Supporting Information S1 Table. From left to right, after state labels: binarized firing rates of dSPN, iSPN, GPi, GPeP, and Th for left (-L) and right (-R) channels; probability of activation (binarized firing rate = 1) for STN and GPeA for left and right channels; mean DT over the trials that visit each state; the ratio of trials that chose left/right for those that visit each state; Kullback–Leibler (KL) divergence between left and right trials’ DT distributions. The grey rows correspond to the initial states that occur early in each trial and never lead directly to a decision, and the green and blue rows correspond to outer CLAW and inner CLAW states, respectively. The states in the lower half of the CLAW are not shown; these are symmetric – up to the swap of certain L and R channel binary values – with the states that lie in corresponding positions in the upper half.