Figure 3 - Source Data 1 Cross-validated model likelihood during stable period for example mice (each data is the median value of corresponding likelihood distribution, each row contains data from one animal) Model 1 (full model) Model 2 (¦Á1 = 0) Model 3 (¦Á2 = 0) Model 4 (¦Á1 = 0, ¦Á2 = 0) Model 5 (¦Â = 0) Model 6 (¦Ã1 = 1) Model 7 (¦Ã2 = 0) RL Model 0.637718238070385 0.681494222740181 0.672743363467017 0.683623822796313 0.677460300908706 0.558369197666465 0.643107043222649 0.679313784355047 0.66494018566057 0.668034854415511 0.664915996714429 0.66688776009153 0.664702102753042 0.560322961150174 0.667166045943659 0.664188270610011 0.649891758094156 0.649060928976284 0.647276181185805 0.649465425391352 0.6520713387144 0.576371315512116 0.652509875429021 0.65136884042475 0.678422622728384 0.675392228617203 0.67003964268349 0.675580927521027 0.679645517234712 0.558471064186295 0.678494385935778 0.678286813211368 0.71871031679855 0.708868393876576 0.736673409495222 0.736280460963109 0.734766385915832 0.560685112325594 0.731764987147554 0.724960944360982 0.709248332269017 0.70210878913042 0.712198705686216 0.715695210476829 0.714337205306857 0.56122653191751 0.712985056150687 0.710699410530242 0.729930017462512 0.739834313951927 0.74300001415788 0.748847907877292 0.748666737026045 0.556401406309569 0.745395278101237 0.756232090836685 0.697619799205088 0.701731997147063 0.701429827061449 0.701920002130815 0.692738760617534 0.584957027140611 0.698400321594835 0.700139624117447 0.744938152902238 0.738368065626469 0.744369866070023 0.744665531041711 0.738404169375007 0.56471945171425 0.733650934123624 0.73885121173563 0.694746218224772 0.713468660148001 0.719513043524408 0.717284717788781 0.689261460030278 0.592747822047497 0.698050832527689 0.716367514528272 ___________________________________ Test results for Model 2 vs Model 1 Column B Model 2 (¦Á1 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.5566 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 34 , -21 Sum of signed ranks (W) 13 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.001132 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.8424 P value (one tailed) 0.0019 P value summary ** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for Model 3 vs Model 1 Column C Model 3 (¦Á2 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.1309 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 43 , -12 Sum of signed ranks (W) 31 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.00338 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.8909 P value (one tailed) 0.0006 P value summary *** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for Model 4 vs Model 1 Column D Model 4 (¦Á1 = 0, ¦Á2 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0371 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary * Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 48 , -7 Sum of signed ranks (W) 41 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.005374 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.8788 P value (one tailed) 0.0008 P value summary *** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for Model 5 vs Model 1 Column E Model 5 (¦Â = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.3750 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 37 , -18 Sum of signed ranks (W) 19 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.001701 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.9515 P value (one tailed) <0.0001 P value summary **** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for Model 6 vs Model 1 Column F Model 6 (¦Ã1 = 1) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0020 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ** Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 0 , -55 Sum of signed ranks (W) -55 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.1163 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.05455 P value (one tailed) 0.4458 P value summary ns Was the pairing significantly effective? No ___________________________________ Test results for Model 7 vs Model 1 Column G Model 7 (¦Ã2 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0488 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary * Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 47 , -8 Sum of signed ranks (W) 39 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.002961 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.9879 P value (one tailed) <0.0001 P value summary **** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for RL Model vs Model 1 Column H RL Model vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0645 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 46 , -9 Sum of signed ranks (W) 37 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.001998 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.8788 P value (one tailed) 0.0008 P value summary *** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for RL Model vs Model 4 Column H RL Model vs. vs. Column D Model 4 (¦Á1 = 0, ¦Á2 = 0) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.3223 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 17 , -38 Sum of signed ranks (W) -21 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.00224 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 1 P value (one tailed) <0.0001 P value summary **** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Cross-validated model likelihood during switching period for example mice (each data is the median value of corresponding likelihood distribution, each row contains data from one animal) Model 1 (full model) Model 2 (¦Á1 = 0) Model 3 (¦Á2 = 0) Model 4 (¦Á1 = 0, ¦Á2 = 0) Model 5 (¦Â = 0) Model 6 (¦Ã1 = 1) Model 7 (¦Ã2 = 0) RL Model 0.659545453739007 0.657419673430703 0.630164901614051 0.654554076658644 0.629736968833532 0.546258812950634 0.581818260684444 0.642387168191371 0.642246998155843 0.644025093592386 0.638528579703755 0.641649719762962 0.599718099271134 0.565079436234697 0.642928057153889 0.641606677560601 0.630301137726123 0.636697910856166 0.641523237897364 0.640321159744048 0.616468935393803 0.53609928459196 0.611153947368635 0.632529724946681 0.635650692560628 0.643782946982389 0.637135257063893 0.642810556065457 0.642244062889 0.504292713728132 0.589758472084201 0.638382240054696 0.661826207559436 0.663553396232213 0.664588029228341 0.667937983794976 0.563965361295274 0.570729940692991 0.565850869347407 0.647400104187471 0.621080209558828 0.637392810389452 0.647830682267915 0.652158451802411 0.584023599132878 0.590172609654828 0.598710755742129 0.648143409680543 0.655079004262679 0.658022476991836 0.65934288716491 0.662618974528468 0.636573409018783 0.527542641783524 0.638413013759701 0.653153336699021 0.652762860246368 0.668411889428061 0.628314835586068 0.659616959732197 0.622094866301896 0.586701385141525 0.615679313562565 0.646530079400125 0.666764040705305 0.669149202729819 0.667762535819877 0.667735540653424 0.664605321382306 0.53022976686289 0.64016609083253 0.667490198905784 0.648457044332429 0.649837229101203 0.647615133402028 0.65187626202887 0.578088478779527 0.567640278640158 0.648134585439447 0.64574040132273 ___________________________________ Test results for Model 2 vs Model 1 Column B Model 2 (¦Á1 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0137 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary * Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 51 , -4 Sum of signed ranks (W) 47 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.002664 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.903 P value (one tailed) 0.0004 P value summary *** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for Model 3 vs Model 1 Column C Model 3 (¦Á2 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.7695 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 31 , -24 Sum of signed ranks (W) 7 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.001242 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.3455 P value (one tailed) 0.1652 P value summary ns Was the pairing significantly effective? No ___________________________________ Test results for Model 4 vs Model 1 Column D Model 4 (¦Á1 = 0, ¦Á2 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0195 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary * Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 50 , -5 Sum of signed ranks (W) 45 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median 0.006483 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.8182 P value (one tailed) 0.0029 P value summary ** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes ___________________________________ Test results for Model 5 vs Model 1 Column E Model 5 (¦Â = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0059 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ** Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 2 , -53 Sum of signed ranks (W) -51 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.03024 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.2485 P value (one tailed) 0.2459 P value summary ns Was the pairing significantly effective? No ___________________________________ Test results for Model 6 vs Model 1 Column F Model 6 (¦Ã1 = 1) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0020 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ** Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 0 , -55 Sum of signed ranks (W) -55 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.09265 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) -0.1515 P value (one tailed) 0.3410 P value summary ns Was the pairing significantly effective? No ___________________________________ Test results for Model 7 vs Model 1 Column G Model 7 (¦Ã2 = 0) vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0059 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ** Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 2 , -53 Sum of signed ranks (W) -51 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.02448 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) -0.04242 P value (one tailed) 0.4592 P value summary ns Was the pairing significantly effective? No ___________________________________ Test results for RL Model vs Model 1 Column H RL Model vs. vs. Column A Model 1 (full model) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.6250 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ns Significantly different (P < 0.05)? No One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 22 , -33 Sum of signed ranks (W) -11 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.001283 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.5394 P value (one tailed) 0.0569 P value summary ns Was the pairing significantly effective? No ___________________________________ Test results for RL Model vs Model 4 Column H RL Model vs. vs. Column D Model 4 (¦Á1 = 0, ¦Á2 = 0) Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test P value 0.0020 Exact or approximate P value? Exact P value summary ** Significantly different (P < 0.05)? Yes One- or two-tailed P value? Two-tailed Sum of positive, negative ranks 0 , -55 Sum of signed ranks (W) -55 Number of pairs 10 Median of differences Median -0.006964 How effective was the pairing? rs (Spearman) 0.8303 P value (one tailed) 0.0024 P value summary ** Was the pairing significantly effective? Yes