skip to main content
research-article

Adaptive Cognitive Training with Reinforcement Learning

Published:04 March 2022Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Computer-assisted cognitive training can help patients affected by several illnesses alleviate their cognitive deficits or healthy people improve their mental performance. In most computer-based systems, training sessions consist of graded exercises, which should ideally be able to gradually improve the trainee’s cognitive functions. Indeed, adapting the difficulty of the exercises to how individuals perform in their execution is crucial to improve the effectiveness of cognitive training activities. In this article, we propose the use of reinforcement learning (RL) to learn how to automatically adapt the difficulty of computerized exercises for cognitive training. In our approach, trainees’ performance in performed exercises is used as a reward to learn a policy that changes over time the values of the parameters that determine exercise difficulty. We illustrate a method to be initially used to learn difficulty-variation policies tailored for specific categories of trainees, and then to refine these policies for single individuals. We present the results of two user studies that provide evidence for the effectiveness of our method: a first study, in which a student category policy obtained via RL was found to have better effects on the cognitive function than a standard baseline training that adopts a mechanism to vary the difficulty proposed by neuropsychologists, and a second study, demonstrating that adding an RL-based individual customization further improves the training process.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Brainer. 2021. Brainer | Riabilitazione Cognitiva. Retrieved November 17, 2021 from http://www.brainer.it.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [2] HAPPYneuron. 2021. Cognitive Therapy Tools, Cognitive Rehabilitation. Retrieved November 17, 2021 from https://www.happyneuronpro.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Schuhfried. 2021. Cognitive Training Program: CogniPlus—SCHUHFRIED. Retrieved November 17, 2021 from https://www.schuhfried.com/cogniplus.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. [4] Erica. 2021. Erica. Retrieved November 17, 2021 from http://www.erica.giuntios.it.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] Neurotracker. 2021. NeuroTracker | #1 Cognitive Training System in the World. Retrieved November 17, 2021 from https://neurotracker.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [6] RehaCom. 2021. RehaCom—Computer-Based Cognitive Therapy. Retrieved November 17, 2021 from https://www.rehacom.co.uk.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. [7] Alloway Tracy Packiam, Bibile Vanessa, and Lau Gemma. 2013. Computerized working memory training: Can it lead to gains in cognitive skills in students? Computers in Human Behavior 29, 3 (2013), 632638. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. [8] Amonn F., Frolich J., Breuer D., Banaschewski T., and Doepfner M.. 2013. Evaluation of a computer-based neuropsychological training in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). NeuroRehabilitation 32, 3 (2013), 555–62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. [9] Assed Mariana Medeiros, Carvalho Martha Kortas Hajjar Veiga de, Rocca Cristiana Castanho de Almeida, and Serafim Antonio de Pádua. 2016. Memory training and benefits for quality of life in the elderly: A case report. Dementia & Neuropsychologia 10, 2 (April–June 2016), 152155. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. [10] Ávila-Sansores Shender, Orihuela-Espina Felipe, and Enrique-Sucar Luis. 2013. Patient tailored virtual rehabilitation. In Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation, Pons José L, Torricelli Diego, and Pajaro Marta (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, Germany, 879883.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. [11] Lopez-Luengo B. and Muela-Martínez J. A.. 2016. Preliminary study of a rehabilitation program based on attentional processes to treat auditory hallucinations. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry 21, 4 (July 2016), 315334.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. [12] Bablani Annushree, Edla Damodar Reddy, Tripathi Diwakar, and Cheruku Ramalingaswamy. 2019. Survey on brain-computer interface: An emerging computational intelligence paradigm. ACM Computing Surveys 52, 1 (2019), 132.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. [13] Bauer Robert and Gharabaghi Alireza. 2015. Reinforcement learning for adaptive threshold control of restorative brain-computer interfaces: A Bayesian simulation. Frontiers in Neuroscience 9 (2015), 36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. [14] Bowie C. R., Grossman M., and Gupta M.. 2017. Action-based cognitive remediation for individuals with serious mental illnesses: Effects of real-world simulations and goal setting on functional and vocational outcomes. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 40, 1 (2017), 5360.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. [15] Cardullo Stefano. 2017. New Frontiers in Neuropsychology. The Padua Rehabilitation Tool: A New Software for Rehabilitation Using Touch-Screen Technology. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Padua.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Cardullo Stefano, Valeria Pes Maria, Ilaria Tognon, Ambra Pesenti, Gamberini Luciano, and Mapelli Daniela. 2016. Padua rehabilitation tool: A pilot study on patients with dementia. In Revised Selected Papers of the 4th International Conference on Games and Learning Alliance—Volume 9599 (GALA 2015). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 292301. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. [17] Cavallo Marco, Trivelli Federica, Adenzato Mauro, Bidoia Elena, Giaretto Roberta Margherita, Oliva Francesco, Ostacoli Luca, Sala Anisa, and Picci Rocco Luigi. 2013. Do neuropsychological and social cognition abilities in schizophrenia change after intensive cognitive training? A pilot study. Clinical Neuropsychiatry 10, 5 (2013), 202212.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. [18] Chen Chih-Ming and Li Yi-Lun. 2010. Personalised context-aware ubiquitous learning system for supporting effective English vocabulary learning. Interactive Learning Environments 18, 4 (2010), 341364.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Christensen Karl Bang, Kreiner Svend, and Mesbah Mounir. 2013. Rasch Models in Health. Wiley Online Library.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. [20] Chrysafiadi Konstantina and Virvou Maria. 2012. Evaluating the integration of fuzzy logic into the student model of a web-based learning environment. Expert Systems with Applications 39, 18 (2012), 1312713134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Coronato Antonio, Naeem Muddasar, Pietro Giuseppe De, and Paragliola Giovanni. 2020. Reinforcement learning for intelligent healthcare applications: A survey. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 109 (2020), 101964. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. [22] Crow Tyne, Luxton-Reilly Andrew, and Wuensche Burkhard. 2018. Intelligent tutoring systems for programming education: A systematic review. In Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE’18). ACM, New York, NY, 5362. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. [23] d’Amato T., Bation R., Cochet A., Jalenques I., Galland F., Giraud-Baro E., Pacaud-Troncin M., et al. 2011. A randomized, controlled trial of computer-assisted cognitive remediation for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research 125, 2-3 (Nov. 2011), 284290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Bruin Eling D. de, Reve Eva van het, and Murer Kurt. 2013. A randomized controlled pilot study assessing the feasibility of combined motor–cognitive training and its effect on gait characteristics in the elderly. Clinical Rehabilitation 27, 3 (2013), 215225. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. [25] Fan-Cheng M. and Ya-Ping D.. 2012. Reinforcement learning adaptive control for upper limb rehabilitation robot based on fuzzy neural network. In Proceedings of the 31st Chinese Control Conference. 51575161.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. [26] Fenza G., Orciuoli F., and Sampson D. G.. 2017. Building adaptive tutoring model using artificial neural networks and reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 17th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’17). 460462. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. [27] Gaspari Mauro, Zini Floriano, and Stecchi Sergio. 2020. Enhancing cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis with a disease-specific tool. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2020 (2020), 114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. [28] Grawemeyer Beate, Mavrikis Manolis, Holmes Wayne, Gutierrez-Santos Sergio, Wiedmann Michael, and Rummel Nikol. 2016. Affecting off-task behaviour: How affect-aware feedback can improve student learning. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK’16). ACM, New York, NY, 104113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. [29] Gronwall D. M. A.. 1977. Paced auditory serial-addition task: A measure of recovery from concussion. Perceptual and Motor Skills 44, 2 (1977), 367373.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. [30] Hagovska Magdalena and Nagyova Iveta. 2017. The transfer of skills from cognitive and physical training to activities of daily living: A randomised controlled study. European Journal of Ageing 14, 2 (June 2017), 133142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. [31] Harvey Philip D.. 2019. Domains of cognition and their assessment. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience 21, 3 (Sept. 2019), 227237. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. [32] Hasson Christopher J., Manczurowsky Julia, and Yen Sheng-Che. 2015. A reinforcement learning approach to gait training improves retention. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9 (2015), 459. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. [33] Moen Frode, Hrozanova Maria, and Stiles Tore. 2018. The effects of perceptual-cognitive training with NeuroTracker on executive brain functions among elite athletes. Cogent Psychology 5, 1 (2018), Article 1544105. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. [34] Mohammadi M. R., Keshavarzi Z., and Talepasand S. B.. 2014. The effectiveness of computerized cognitive rehabilitation training program in improving cognitive abilities of schizophrenia clients. Iran Journal of Psychiatry 9, 4 (Oct. 2014), 209215.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. [35] Motter J. N., Pimontel M. A., Rindskopf D., Devanand D. P., Doraiswamy P. M., and Sneed J. R.. 2016. Computerized cognitive training and functional recovery in major depressive disorder: A meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders 189, 1 (2016), 184191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. [36] Mousavinasab Elham, Zarifsanaiey Nahid, Kalhori Sharareh R. Niakan, Rakhshan Mahnaz, Keikha Leila, and Saeedi Marjan Ghazi. 2018. Intelligent tutoring systems: A systematic review of characteristics, applications, and evaluation methods. Interactive Learning Environments 29, 1 (2018), 122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. [37] Mulder Theo and Hochstenbach Jacqueline. 2001. Adaptability and flexibility of the human motor system: Implications for neurological rehabilitation. Neural Plasticity 8, 1–2 (2001), 131140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. [38] Naros Georgios and Gharabaghi Alireza. 2015. Reinforcement learning of self-regulated \( \beta \)-oscillations for motor restoration in chronic stroke. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9 (2015), 391.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. [39] Nwana Hyacinth S.. 1990. Intelligent tutoring systems: An overview. Artificial Intelligence Review 4, 4 (1990), 251277. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. [40] Pedullà Ludovico, Brichetto Giampaolo, Tacchino Andrea, Vassallo Claudio, Zaratin Paola, Battaglia Mario, Bonzano Laura, and Bove Marco. 2016. Adaptive vs. non-adaptive cognitive training by means of a personalized app: A randomized trial in people with multiple sclerosis. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 13, 1 (Oct. 2016), 88. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. [41] Peretz C., Korczyn A. D., Shatil E., Aharonson V., Birnboim S., and Giladi N.. 2011. Computer-based, personalized cognitive training versus classical computer games: A randomized double-blind prospective trial of cognitive stimulation. Neuroepidemiology 36, 2 (2011), 9199. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. [42] Petersen R. C. and Morris J. C.. 2005. Mild cognitive impairment as a clinical entity and treatment target. Archives of Neurology 62, 7 (2005), 11641166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. [43] Reinkensmeyer David J., Guigon Emmanuel, and Maier Marc A.. 2012. A computational model of use-dependent motor recovery following a stroke: Optimizing corticospinal activations via reinforcement learning can explain residual capacity and other strength recovery dynamics. Neural Networks 29–30 (2012), 6069. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. [44] Rudary Matthew, Singh Satinder, and Pollack Martha E.. 2004. Adaptive cognitive orthotics: Combining reinforcement learning and constraint-based temporal reasoning. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML’04). ACM, New York, NY, 91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. [45] Sauro Jeff and Lewis James R.. 2016. Quantifying the User Experience: Practical Statistics for User Research (2nd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. [46] Semkovska M., Ahern, Lonargáin D. O., Lambe S., and McLaughlin D. M.. 2015. Efficacy of neurocognitive remediation therapy during an acute depressive episode and following remission: Results from two randomised pilot studies. European Psychiatry 30, 1 (2015), 403.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. [47] Shen Shitian and Chi Min. 2016. Reinforcement learning: The sooner the better, or the later the better? In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on User Modeling Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP’16). ACM, New York, NY, 3744. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Shute V. J. and Zapata-Rivera D.. 2010. Intelligent systems. In International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed.), Peterson Penelope, Baker Eva, and McGaw Barry (Eds.). Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 7580. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Stablum Franca. 2005. PASAT: Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task. Technical Report. Department of General Psychology, University of Padova.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. [50] Sutton Richard S. and Barto Andrew. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. [51] Taylor Matthew E. and Stone Peter. 2009. Transfer learning for reinforcement learning domains: A survey. Journal of Machine Learning Research 10 (Dec. 2009), 16331685.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. [52] Tombaugh Tom N.. 2006. A comprehensive review of the paced auditory serial addition test (PASAT). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 21, 1 (2006), 5376. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. [53] Treutwein Bernhard. 1995. Adaptive psychophysical procedures. Vision Research 35, 17 (1995), 25032522. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. [54] Tucha Oliver, Tucha Lara, Kaumann Gesa, König Sebastian, Lange Katharina M., Stasik Dorota, Streather Zoe, Engelschalk Tobias, and Lange Klaus W.. 2011. Training of attention functions in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders 3, 3 (Sept. 2011), 271283. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. [55] Vlagsma Thialda T., Duits Annelien A., Dijkstra Hilde T., Laar Teus van, and Spikman Jacoba M.. 2020. Effectiveness of ReSET; a strategic executive treatment for executive dysfunctioning in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 30, 1 (2020), 6784. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. [56] Yhnell Emma, Furby Hannah, Breen Rachel S., Brookes-Howell Lucy C., Drew Cheney J. G., Playle Rebecca, Watson Gareth, Metzler-Baddeley Claudia, Rosser Anne E., and Busse Monica E.. 2018. Exploring computerised cognitive training as a therapeutic intervention for people with Huntington’s disease (CogTrainHD): Protocol for a randomised feasibility study. Pilot and Feasibility Studies 4 (2018), 45. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. [57] Yom-Tov Elad, Feraru Guy, Kozdoba Mark, Mannor Shie, Tennenholtz Moshe, and Hochberg Irit. 2017. Encouraging physical activity in patients with diabetes: Intervention using a reinforcement learning system. Journal of Medical Internet Research 19, 10 (Oct. 2017), e338. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. [58] Yu Chao, Liu Jiming, and Nemati Shamim. 2020. Reinforcement learning in healthcare: A survey. arxiv:1908.08796[cs.LG].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. [59] Zhou Guojing, Azizsoltani Hamoon, Ausin Markel Sanz, Barnes Tiffany, and Chi Min. 2019. Hierarchical reinforcement learning for pedagogical policy induction. In Artificial Intelligence in Education, Isotani Seiji, Millán Eva, Ogan Amy, Hastings Peter, McLaren Bruce, and Luckin Rose (Eds.). Springer International, Cham, Switzerland, 544556.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. [60] Zhou Mo, Mintz Yonatan, Fukuoka Yoshimi, Goldberg Ken, Flowers Elena, Kaminsky Philip, Castillejo Alejandro, and Aswani Anil. 2018. Personalizing mobile fitness apps using reinforcement learning. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2068 (March 2018). , http://ceur–ws.org/Vol–2068/humanize7.pdf https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32405286.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. [61] Zimmermann Ronan, Gschwandtner Ute, Benz Nina, Hatz Florian, Schindler Christian, Taub Ethan, and Fuhr Peter. 2014. Cognitive training in Parkinson disease: Cognition-specific vs nonspecific computer training. Neurology 82, 14 (April 2014), 12191226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Adaptive Cognitive Training with Reinforcement Learning

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems
            ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems  Volume 12, Issue 1
            March 2022
            206 pages
            ISSN:2160-6455
            EISSN:2160-6463
            DOI:10.1145/3505196
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 4 March 2022
            • Accepted: 1 June 2021
            • Revised: 1 April 2021
            • Received: 1 May 2020
            Published in tiis Volume 12, Issue 1

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Refereed
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)327
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)49

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          Full Text

          View this article in Full Text.

          View Full Text

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format