scholarly journals Stimulus Control of Odorant Concentration: Pilot Study of Generalization and Discrimination of Odor Concentration in Canines

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 326
Author(s):  
Mallory T. DeChant ◽  
Paul C. Bunker ◽  
Nathaniel J. Hall
Keyword(s):  
Stimulus Control ◽  
Training Stimulus ◽  
Generalization Test ◽  
Negative Stimulus ◽  
Isoamyl Acetate ◽  
Stimulus Generalization ◽  
Test Compound ◽  
Similar Concentration ◽  
Odor Concentration ◽  
Detection Systems

Despite dogs’ widespread use as detection systems, little is known about how dogs generalize to variations of an odorant’s concentration. Further, it is unclear whether dogs can be trained to discriminate between similar concentration variations of an odorant. Four dogs were trained to an odorant (0.01 air dilution of isoamyl acetate) in an air-dilution olfactometer, and we assessed spontaneous generalization to a range of concentrations lower than the training stimulus (Generalization Test 1). Dogs generalized to odors within a 10-fold range of the training odorant. Next, we conducted discrimination training to suppress responses to concentrations lower than a concentration dogs showed initial responding towards in Generalization Test 1 (0.0025 air dilution). Dogs successfully discriminated between 0.0025 and 0.01, exceeding 90% accuracy. However, when a second generalization test was conducted (Generalization Test 2), responding at the 0.0025 concentration immediately recovered and was no different than in Generalization Test 1. Dogs were then tested in another generalization test (Compound Discrimination and Generalization) in which generalization probes were embedded within discrimination trials, and dogs showed suppression of responding to the 0.0025 concentration and lower concentrations in this preparation. These data suggest dogs show limited spontaneous generalization across odor concentration and that dogs can be trained to discriminate between similar concentrations of the same odorant. Stimulus control, however, may depend on the negative stimulus, suggesting olfactory concentration generalization may depend on relative stimulus control. These results highlight the importance of considering odor concentration as a dimension for generalization in canine olfactory research.

Some Determinants of the Peak Shift in Stimulus Generalization

1973 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie G. Weinberg
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Training ◽  
Positive Reinforcement ◽  
Behavioral Contrast ◽  
Generalization Test ◽  
Variable Interval ◽  
Peak Shift ◽  
Test Session ◽  
Stimulus Generalization ◽  
Physical Separation ◽  
Subsequent Discrimination

Rats were pretrained in the presence of an auditory click rate stimulus of 14 pps correlated with variable-interval or variable-ratio reinforcement. During subsequent discrimination training, the added stimulus, correlated with extinction, was 18, 36, 72, or 0 (no sound) pps. After discrimination, Ss were given a generalization test session, in extinction, in which five click rate stimuli were presented. The inverse relationship between physical separation of the discrimination training stimuli and amount of peak shift of the generalization gradient occurred regardless of the original positive reinforcement schedule during training. Behavioral contrast was not produced by all Ss. Results demonstrated no effect of separation of training stimuli on behavioral contrast and that behavioral contrast and peak shift need not covary.

Emergent Simple Discrimination in Children: Transfer of Stimulus Control under Non-Reinforced Conditions

1991 ◽  
Vol 43 (4b) ◽  
pp. 361-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. Smeets
Keyword(s):  
Preschool Children ◽  
Test Stimulus ◽  
Stimulus Control ◽  
Training Stimulus ◽  
Simple Discrimination ◽  
Correct Stimulus ◽  
Transfer Of Stimulus Control ◽  
Incorrect Stimulus

Previous research on humans suggests that simple discriminations may emerge if both stimuli, B1 and B2, are compounded with the stimuli of a previously trained discrimination, A1 (S+) and A2 (S-), and responding to the compounds, B1A1 and B2A2, is reinforced. Two questions were addressed. First, do simple discriminations also emerge if (a) only one stimulus, B1, is compounded with a training stimulus, A1 (S+) or A2 (S-); or with both training stimuli, A1 (S+) and A2 (S-); and (b) neither B1 nor B2 is compounded with the training stimuli? Second, do simple discriminations emerge if reinforcement in the presence of the AB compounds is withheld? Normal preschool children served as subjects. The study consisted of six experiments. Transfer occurred in all experiments regardless of whether both test stimuli, one test stimulus, or none of the test stimuli were compounded with the training stimuli under non-reinforced conditions. The results can be described by the following rules: Respond to any stimulus that includes a component of a “correct” stimulus of a previous discrimination. Otherwise, respond away from the stimulus that incorporates a component from an “incorrect” stimulus of a previous discrimination. The implications of data for sensory pre-conditioning and language-based accounts are discussed.

Effects of ectostriatal lesions on natural concept, pseudoconcept, and artificial pattern discrimination in pigeons

1991 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 497-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shigeru Watanabe
Keyword(s):  
Visual Processing ◽  
Generalization Test ◽  
Pattern Discrimination ◽  
Stimulus Generalization ◽  
Object Discrimination ◽  
Food Object ◽  
Natural Stimuli ◽  
Natural Concept ◽  
Concept Discrimination

AbstractPigeons were trained on four different visual discrimination tasks: (1) concept of natural stimuli (food vs. non-food object discrimination); (2) arbitrary classification of natural stimuli (pseudoconcept); (3) concept of artificial stimuli (triangles generated by computer graphics); and (4) discrimination of one pair of artificial stimuli. Then, lesions of the ectostriatum were carried out. The ectostriatal lesions impaired the arbitrary classification of natural stimuli and the concept of artificial pattern but did not impair the natural concept or the simple discrimination of fixed two stimuli. Lesions in the neostriatum did not cause deficits in any discrimination task. The birds had to learn individual stimuli for the arbitrary classification of stimuli and the stimulus generalization test after the artificial pattern concept discrimination indicated that the pigeons formed a concept more complicated than “triangle” in human language. These results suggest that the ectostriatum plays a role in task discrimination that requires much visual processing to classify stimuli.

Discrimination of Word-Like Compound Visual Stimuli by Monkeys

1977 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gaffan
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Visual Discrimination ◽  
Generalization Test ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Negative Stimulus ◽  
Initial Training ◽  
Animal Discrimination Learning ◽  
Positive Stimuli ◽  
Negative Stimuli

In Experiment I, two monkeys solved a successive visual discrimination in which the four positive stimuli were the visual arrays RIM, LID, RAD and LAM while the four negative stimuli were RID, LIM, RAM and LAD. In Experiment II the same monkeys first learned a discrimination where the positive stimuli were pairs of letters (e.g. OB and AK) while the negative stimulus was the letter I; in a subsequent generalization test with all four possible pairings of the stimulus elements that had been positive during training (i.e. with OB, AK, OK and AB) the monkeys responded more strongly to the pairs that had been present in initial training. These results were discussed in relation to the theoretical analysis of configurational cues in animal discrimination learning and to the mechanism underlying visual discrimination of words by people.

Stimulus Control after Intradimensional Discrimination Training

1971 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. T. Stoddard ◽  
Murray Sidman
Keyword(s):  
Test Stimulus ◽  
Discrimination Training ◽  
Stimulus Control ◽  
Rhesus Monkeys ◽  
Generalization Test ◽  
Original Training ◽  
Stimulus Response

4 rhesus monkeys received intradimensional discrimination training initially at distant and then at near points on a circle-ellipse continuum. The training did not necessarily produce good stimulus control by test-stimulus differences smaller than the original training values. It was concluded that the original controlling stimulus-response relation did not correspond with the relations being evaluated by the generalization test.

Patterns of intracellular potentials in salamander mitral/tufted cells in response to odor stimulation

1989 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 609-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. A. Hamilton ◽  
J. S. Kauer
Keyword(s):  
Single Cells ◽  
Initial Period ◽  
Temporal Patterns ◽  
Olfactory Nerve ◽  
Isoamyl Acetate ◽  
Membrane Hyperpolarization ◽  
Odor Concentration ◽  
Single Period ◽  
Phase Saturation ◽  
High Concentrations

1. Changes in membrane potential and temporal patterns of spikes were analyzed in 30 output cells in the salamander olfactory bulb in response to stimulation with 1-s pulses of the odorants isoamyl acetate, cineole, and camphor. The odor responses were more complex than responses to electrical stimulation of the olfactory nerve or olfactory tracts, with which they were compared. Most began with hyperpolarization and contained prolonged hyperpolarizing and depolarizing potentials that appeared to be compound postsynaptic potentials. These potentials were related to periods of spike inhibition and excitation. The temporal patterns of the responses resembled S-type (for suppression) and E-type (for excitation) patterns described previously in extracellular-unit studies. 2. In single cells, graded but nonmonotonic changes in the responses were observed with increases in the odor concentration from 10(-3) to 10(-1) vapor-phase saturation. Abrupt changes from one category of temporal response pattern to another were generally not observed in response to different concentrations of a single odorant but were frequently observed when the stimulus was changed from one odorant to another. 3. In S-type patterns, the first event was always membrane hyperpolarization and spike inhibition, regardless of the odor concentration. At all concentrations, simple S-type responses were observed in which a single period of hyperpolarization and inhibition lasted several seconds. At moderate to high concentrations, complex S-type responses were observed in which a period of excitation followed an initial period of hyperpolarization and inhibition. In these responses, spikes were often elicited near the termination of the odor pulse, occasionally as early as 300-400 ms after pulse onset. A prolonged period of inhibition followed the period of excitation. 4. In E-type patterns, the first event depended on the odor concentration. At all concentrations, complex responses were observed in which a period of excitation occurred with short latency, followed by a period of inhibition. At low to moderate concentrations, a brief initial period of hyperpolarization preceded the excitation. This initial period of hyperpolarization was always shorter than those in complex S-type responses to equivalent concentrations. However, the range of spike latencies overlapped that of S-type responses to high concentrations. With increasing odor concentration, spike latencies in the E-type responses decreased relative to the onset and peak of the initial hyperpolarization. At high concentrations. spikes were frequently elicited preceding a single period of hyperpolarization and inhibition.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Dimensional Shift and the Transfer of Attention

1993 ◽  
Vol 46 (3b) ◽  
pp. 225-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne Whitney ◽  
K. Geoffrey White
Keyword(s):  
Irrelevant Dimension ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Generalization Test ◽  
Transfer Task ◽  
Relevant Dimension ◽  
Stimulus Generalization ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Specific Stimulus ◽  
Learned Irrelevance ◽  
Orientation Stimulus

Dimensional shift was examined by generating gradients of two-dimensional stimulus generalization for intradimensional and extradimensional transfer of attention. Undergraduates discriminated between lines varying in length and orientation. Stimulus values were relevant on one dimension and irrelevant on another. For intradimensional transfer, the Phase 2 transfer task involved discriminating between new values on the dimension that was relevant in Phase 1. For extradimensional transfer, Phase 2 involved discriminating between new values on the dimension that was irrelevant in Phase 1. Extradimensional transfer was learned in twice the number of trials that were required for intradimensional transfer. In Experiment 1, generalization gradients obtained at different stages of Phase 2 training showed that control by the relevant dimension was maintained throughout the intradimensional transfer. In the extradimensional transfer, however, control by the previously relevant dimension was gradually lost before control by the new relevant dimension was acquired. Experiment 2 showed that the advantage of intradimensional over extradimensional transfer could not be attributed to cue-specific stimulus generalization. Experiment 3 showed that in extradimensional transfer the irrelevant dimension in Phase 1 retarded acquisition of control by the new relevant dimension in Phase 2. Experiment 4 showed that the irrelevant dimension masked control by the relevant dimension in the generalization test, but verified the conclusion from Experiment 3 that learned irrelevance contributed to the intradimensional-extra-dimensional transfer difference.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document