Construct · 2 fields · 3 citations

Where does arbitration collide?

One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.

● jingle · one word, two constructs Nearest construct by meaningsettlementcompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to arbitration is settlement.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

arbitration2 CONSTRUCTSBus arbitrationCHANEY · ARBITER CIRCUITNeural arbitrationDAW · DUAL CONTROL

Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

1973Bus arbitration2011Neural arbitration
2026

Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.

Computer engineering

Deciding which requester gets a shared resource

The mechanism that decides which of several competing requesters is granted a shared resource, such as a bus, a memory, or a communication channel, when more than one asks at once. Chaney and Molnar's 1973 Anomalous Behavior of Synchronizer and Arbiter Circuits analyzed the arbiter, the circuit element that must pick one requester and can enter a metastable state when two requests arrive together. The referent is a hardware or protocol rule that allocates access and prevents collisions, counted in grants and latency, and it is unrelated to a third party settling a legal dispute or a brain choosing between two learning systems.[1]

Unit
One grant decision among requesters competing for a shared resource
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Characterized by arbitration latency, fairness across requesters, and the probability of metastable failure

Neuroscience

Allocating control between model-based and model-free learning

The brain's allocation of behavioral control between two ways of learning: a model-based system that plans using an internal model of the world, and a model-free system that repeats whatever has paid off before. Daw, Gershman, Seymour, Dayan, and Dolan's 2011 Model-Based Influences on Humans' Choices and Striatal Prediction Errors showed that human choices blend the two systems, and Lee, Shimojo, and O'Doherty's 2014 Neural Computations Underlying Arbitration between Model-Based and Model-free Learning named and located the arbitration that shifts weight between them. The referent is a neural control process inside one decision maker, estimated from choices and brain signals, not a legal award or a circuit granting access to a wire.[2][3]

Unit
The weighting that shifts control between the model-based and model-free systems
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Inferred from choice behavior and from fMRI signals in prefrontal cortex that track how reliable each system is

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how arbitration sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collision

Nearby collisions

control4 fields · 5 citationsjingle · one word, four constructssignal5 fields · 5 citationsjingle · one word, five constructs

References

  1. Chaney, T. J., & Molnar, C. E. (1973). Anomalous behavior of synchronizer and arbiter circuits. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-22(4), 421-422. https://doi.org/10.1109/T-C.1973.223730
  2. Daw, N. D., Gershman, S. J., Seymour, B., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2011). Model-based influences on humans' choices and striatal prediction errors. Neuron, 69(6), 1204-1215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.027
  3. Lee, S. W., Shimojo, S., & O'Doherty, J. P. (2014). Neural computations underlying arbitration between model-based and model-free learning. Neuron, 81(3), 687-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.11.028

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct