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