fit-drift-diffusion-model
О программе
Этот навык подгоняет модели дрейфа-диффузии Рэтклиффа (DDM) к данным бинарного принятия решений, оценивая когнитивные параметры, такие как скорость дрейфа и разделение границ, на основе времени реакции и точности. Он позволяет сравнивать модели, проверять восстановление параметров и разлагать компромиссы между скоростью и точностью на латентные компоненты. Используйте его, когда необходимо анализировать экспериментальные данные с помощью моделей последовательной выборки или оценивать лежащие в основе когнитивные процессы.
Быстрая установка
Claude Code
Рекомендуетсяnpx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanacgit clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/fit-drift-diffusion-modelСкопируйте и вставьте эту команду в Claude Code для установки этого навыка
Документация
Fit a Drift-Diffusion Model
Estimate DDM params from RT + accuracy, eval fit vs observed quantiles, compare variants, validate via parameter recovery.
Use When
- Binary decision-making w/ RT data
- Estimate cognitive params (drift, boundary, non-decision) from exp
- Compare sequential sampling variants
- Validate DDM pipeline recovers known params
- Decompose speed-accuracy tradeoff → latent cognitive components
In
- Required: RT data w/ accuracy (correct/error) per trial
- Required: Subject + condition IDs
- Required: DDM variant (basic 3-param, full 7-param, hierarchical)
- Optional: Prior distributions Bayesian (default weakly informative)
- Optional: N simulated datasets for recovery (default 100)
- Optional: RT filter bounds s (default 0.1 to 5.0)
Do
Step 1: Prepare Data
Clean + format raw behavioral for DDM.
- Load + inspect columns:
import pandas as pd
data = pd.read_csv("behavioral_data.csv")
required_columns = ["subject_id", "condition", "rt", "accuracy"]
assert all(col in data.columns for col in required_columns), \
f"Missing columns: {set(required_columns) - set(data.columns)}"
- Filter outlier RTs:
rt_lower = 0.1 # seconds
rt_upper = 5.0 # seconds
n_before = len(data)
data = data[(data["rt"] >= rt_lower) & (data["rt"] <= rt_upper)]
n_removed = n_before - len(data)
print(f"Removed {n_removed} trials ({100*n_removed/n_before:.1f}%) outside [{rt_lower}, {rt_upper}]s")
- Summary stats per subject + condition:
summary = data.groupby(["subject_id", "condition"]).agg(
n_trials=("rt", "count"),
mean_rt=("rt", "mean"),
accuracy=("accuracy", "mean")
).reset_index()
print(summary.describe())
- Verify min trial counts (DDM needs data per cell):
min_trials = summary["n_trials"].min()
assert min_trials >= 40, f"Minimum trials per cell is {min_trials}; need at least 40 for stable estimation"
→ Cleaned df, no outliers, ≥40 trials/cell, accuracy 0.50-0.99.
If err: low trial counts → collapse conditions or remove subjects w/ excessive missing. Accuracy ceiling (>0.99) or floor (<0.55) → DDM may not be identifiable, check task difficulty.
Step 2: Select Variant
Complexity based on research q.
- Candidate variants:
model_variants = {
"basic": {
"params": ["v", "a", "t"],
"description": "Drift rate, boundary separation, non-decision time",
"free_params": 3
},
"full": {
"params": ["v", "a", "t", "z", "sv", "sz", "st"],
"description": "Basic + starting point bias, cross-trial variability",
"free_params": 7
},
"hddm": {
"params": ["v", "a", "t", "z"],
"description": "Hierarchical with group-level and subject-level parameters",
"free_params": "4 per subject + 8 group-level"
}
}
- Select on data chars:
| Criterion | Basic (3-param) | Full (7-param) | Hierarchical |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trials per cell | 40-100 | 200+ | 40+ (pooled) |
| Subjects | Any | Any | 10+ |
| Research goal | Group effects | Individual fits | Both levels |
| Error RT shape | Symmetric | Asymmetric | Either |
- Configure:
selected_variant = "basic" # adjust based on criteria above
model_config = model_variants[selected_variant]
print(f"Selected: {selected_variant} ({model_config['free_params']} free parameters)")
print(f"Parameters: {', '.join(model_config['params'])}")
→ Variant selected w/ justification based trial counts, subjects, research q.
If err: unsure → start basic, add complexity only if residual diagnostics indicate misfit (err RT distribution mismatch).
Step 3: Estimate
Fit via MLE or Bayesian.
- MLE via
fast-dmor Pythonpyddm:
import pyddm
model = pyddm.Model(
drift=pyddm.DriftConstant(drift=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0, maxval=5)),
bound=pyddm.BoundConstant(B=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0.3, maxval=3.0)),
nondecision=pyddm.NonDecisionConstant(t=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0.1, maxval=0.5)),
overlay=pyddm.OverlayNonDecision(nondectime=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0.1, maxval=0.5)),
T_dur=5.0,
dt=0.001,
dx=0.001
)
- Bayesian via HDDM:
import hddm
hddm_model = hddm.HDDM(data, depends_on={"v": "condition"})
hddm_model.find_starting_values()
hddm_model.sample(5000, burn=1000, thin=2, dbname="traces.db", db="pickle")
- Extract + store:
params = hddm_model.get_group_estimates()
print("Group-level parameter estimates:")
for param_name, stats in params.items():
print(f" {param_name}: {stats['mean']:.3f} [{stats['2.5q']:.3f}, {stats['97.5q']:.3f}]")
- Convergence (Bayesian only):
from kabuki.analyze import gelman_rubin
convergence = gelman_rubin(hddm_model)
max_rhat = max(convergence.values())
print(f"Max Gelman-Rubin R-hat: {max_rhat:.3f}")
assert max_rhat < 1.1, f"Chains have not converged (R-hat = {max_rhat:.3f})"
→ Param estimates w/ SE or CI. Bayesian: R-hat < 1.1 all params. Drift typ 0.5-4.0, boundary 0.5-2.5, non-decision 0.15-0.50s.
If err: no convergence → (a) tighter bounds, (b) better starting via grid search, (c) longer chains + more burn-in. MLE hits boundary → misspecified.
Step 4: Evaluate Fit
Compare predicted + observed RT via quantile.
- Predicted RT quantiles:
import numpy as np
quantiles = [0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9]
predicted_rts = model.simulate(n_trials=10000)
pred_quantiles = np.quantile(predicted_rts[predicted_rts > 0], quantiles) # correct
pred_quantiles_err = np.quantile(np.abs(predicted_rts[predicted_rts < 0]), quantiles) # error
- Observed:
obs_correct = data[data["accuracy"] == 1]["rt"]
obs_error = data[data["accuracy"] == 0]["rt"]
obs_quantiles = np.quantile(obs_correct, quantiles)
obs_quantiles_err = np.quantile(obs_error, quantiles) if len(obs_error) > 10 else None
- QP plot:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize=(8, 6))
ax.scatter(obs_quantiles, quantiles, marker="o", label="Observed (correct)")
ax.scatter(pred_quantiles, quantiles, marker="x", label="Predicted (correct)")
if obs_quantiles_err is not None:
ax.scatter(obs_quantiles_err, quantiles, marker="o", facecolors="none", label="Observed (error)")
ax.scatter(pred_quantiles_err, quantiles, marker="x", label="Predicted (error)")
ax.set_xlabel("RT (s)")
ax.set_ylabel("Quantile")
ax.legend()
ax.set_title("Quantile-Probability Plot")
fig.savefig("qp_plot.png", dpi=150)
- Fit statistic (chi-square quantile bins):
from scipy.stats import chisquare
observed_proportions = np.diff(np.concatenate([[0], quantiles, [1]]))
predicted_proportions = np.diff(np.concatenate([[0], quantiles, [1]]))
chi2, p_value = chisquare(observed_proportions, predicted_proportions)
print(f"Chi-square fit: chi2={chi2:.3f}, p={p_value:.3f}")
→ QP shows predicted closely tracking observed for both correct + error. Chi-square non-sig (p > 0.05).
If err: systematically misses fast/slow quantiles → add cross-trial variability (sv, st). Err RT shape wrong → add starting point variability (sz). Refit extended.
Step 5: Compare Models
Information criteria for variant selection.
- Fit each + collect stats:
model_results = {}
for variant_name in ["basic", "full"]:
fitted_model = fit_ddm(data, variant=variant_name)
model_results[variant_name] = {
"log_likelihood": fitted_model.log_likelihood,
"n_params": fitted_model.n_free_params,
"bic": fitted_model.bic,
"aic": fitted_model.aic
}
- Compute + compare BIC:
print("Model Comparison (BIC):")
print(f"{'Model':<15} {'LL':>10} {'k':>5} {'BIC':>12} {'delta_BIC':>12}")
print("-" * 55)
best_bic = min(r["bic"] for r in model_results.values())
for name, result in sorted(model_results.items(), key=lambda x: x[1]["bic"]):
delta = result["bic"] - best_bic
print(f"{name:<15} {result['log_likelihood']:>10.1f} {result['n_params']:>5} "
f"{result['bic']:>12.1f} {delta:>12.1f}")
- Interpret BIC (Kass & Raftery, 1995):
# BIC difference interpretation (Kass & Raftery, 1995):
# 0-2: Not worth mentioning
# 2-6: Positive evidence
# 6-10: Strong evidence
# >10: Very strong evidence
- Bayesian → DIC or WAIC:
dic = hddm_model.dic
print(f"DIC: {dic:.1f}")
→ Clear winner w/ BIC diff >6, or justified retain simpler when <2.
If err: indistinguishable (BIC diff <2) → simpler model (parsimony). Full wins big → ensure basic not misspecified due to data issues.
Step 6: Parameter Recovery
Verify pipeline recovers known params from simulated.
- Ground-truth grid:
true_params = {
"v": [0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0],
"a": [0.6, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0],
"t": [0.2, 0.3, 0.4]
}
- Simulate + re-estimate:
from itertools import product
recovery_results = []
n_simulated_trials = 500 # match empirical trial count
for v_true, a_true, t_true in product(true_params["v"], true_params["a"], true_params["t"]):
simulated_data = simulate_ddm(v=v_true, a=a_true, t=t_true, n=n_simulated_trials)
fitted = fit_ddm(simulated_data, variant="basic")
recovery_results.append({
"v_true": v_true, "v_est": fitted.params["v"],
"a_true": a_true, "a_est": fitted.params["a"],
"t_true": t_true, "t_est": fitted.params["t"]
})
- Recovery stats:
recovery_df = pd.DataFrame(recovery_results)
for param in ["v", "a", "t"]:
correlation = recovery_df[f"{param}_true"].corr(recovery_df[f"{param}_est"])
bias = (recovery_df[f"{param}_est"] - recovery_df[f"{param}_true"]).mean()
rmse = np.sqrt(((recovery_df[f"{param}_est"] - recovery_df[f"{param}_true"])**2).mean())
print(f"{param}: r={correlation:.3f}, bias={bias:.4f}, RMSE={rmse:.4f}")
- Recovery scatter plots:
fig, axes = plt.subplots(1, 3, figsize=(15, 5))
for idx, param in enumerate(["v", "a", "t"]):
ax = axes[idx]
ax.scatter(recovery_df[f"{param}_true"], recovery_df[f"{param}_est"], alpha=0.5)
lims = [recovery_df[f"{param}_true"].min(), recovery_df[f"{param}_true"].max()]
ax.plot(lims, lims, "k--", label="Identity")
ax.set_xlabel(f"True {param}")
ax.set_ylabel(f"Estimated {param}")
ax.set_title(f"Recovery: {param} (r={recovery_df[f'{param}_true'].corr(recovery_df[f'{param}_est']):.3f})")
ax.legend()
fig.tight_layout()
fig.savefig("parameter_recovery.png", dpi=150)
→ Recovery correlations r > 0.85 all, bias near zero (< 5% range), RMSE acceptable.
If err: low recovery specific param → (a) insufficient trials → increase n_simulated_trials, (b) param tradeoffs — drift + boundary can trade off, fix one to test recoverability, (c) flat likelihood surface → reparameterize or Bayesian w/ informative priors.
Check
- Input has RT + accuracy correct types
- Outlier filter removed <10%
- Every subject-condition cell ≥40 trials
- Param estimates plausible (v: 0-5, a: 0.3-3.0, t: 0.1-0.6)
- Convergence pass (R-hat < 1.1 Bayesian, gradient ~0 MLE)
- QP within 50ms of observed
- Comparison clear rank or justified parsimony
- Recovery correlations > 0.85 all free
- Recovery bias < 5% range
Traps
- Insufficient trials: DDM data-hungry. <40 per cell → unstable + poor recovery. Always verify before fitting.
- Ignore error RTs: DDM jointly models correct + error. Discard err trials throws away boundary + starting point bias info.
- No filter fast guesses: <100ms likely anticipatory contaminants. Include → distort non-decision time.
- Confuse variants: Basic assumes no cross-trial variability. Err RTs systematically faster than correct → need full w/ sv + sz.
- Overfit full: 7-param can overfit sparse. Use BIC (penalizes complexity) not AIC for DDM selection.
- Skip recovery: W/o recovery validation → can't distinguish estimation bias from true exp effects. Always run before interpreting condition diffs.
→
analyze-diffusion-dynamics— mathematical analysis diffusion processimplement-diffusion-network— generative diffusion sharing forward-process frameworkdesign-experiment— experimental design for DDM-quality datawrite-testthat-tests— testing estimation pipelines in R
GitHub репозиторий
Похожие навыки
evaluating-llms-harness
ТестированиеЭтот навык Claude запускает lm-evaluation-harness для тестирования LLM на более чем 60 стандартизированных академических задачах, таких как MMLU и GSM8K. Он предназначен для разработчиков, чтобы сравнивать качество моделей, отслеживать прогресс обучения или сообщать академические результаты. Инструмент поддерживает различные бэкенды, включая модели HuggingFace и vLLM.
cloudflare-cron-triggers
ТестированиеЭтот навык предоставляет обширные знания по реализации Cloudflare Cron Triggers для планирования запуска Workers с помощью cron-выражений. Он охватывает настройку периодических задач, заданий технического обслуживания и автоматизированных рабочих процессов, а также решение распространенных проблем, таких как неверные cron-выражения и ошибки часовых поясов. Разработчики могут использовать его для настройки планировщиков обработчиков, тестирования cron-триггеров и интеграции с Workflows и Green Compute.
webapp-testing
ТестированиеЭтот навык Claude предоставляет инструментарий на базе Playwright для тестирования локальных веб-приложений с помощью Python-скриптов. Он позволяет проводить проверку фронтенда, отладку интерфейса, создание скриншотов и просмотр логов, одновременно управляя жизненным циклом сервера. Используйте его для задач автоматизации браузера, но запускайте скрипты напрямую, вместо чтения их исходного кода, чтобы избежать загрязнения контекста.
finishing-a-development-branch
ТестированиеЭтот навык помогает разработчикам завершать готовую работу, проверяя прохождение тестов и предлагая структурированные варианты интеграции. Он направляет рабочий процесс по слиянию, созданию пул-реквестов или очистке веток после завершения реализации. Используйте его, когда ваш код готов и протестирован, чтобы систематически завершать процесс разработки.
