{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02106649111257406, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026333113890717576, 'mean_word_length': 6.0046082949308754, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Unification of Countermanding and Perceptual Decision-making

Perceptual decision-making, studied using two-alternative forced-choice tasks, is explained by sequential sampling models of evidence accumulation, which correspond to the dynamics of neurons in sensorimotor structures of the brain1 2. Response inhibition, studied using stop-signal (countermanding) tasks, is explained by a race model of the initiation or canceling of a response, which correspond to the dynamics of neurons in sensorimotor structures3 4. Neither standard model accounts for performance of the other task. Sequential sampling models incorporate response initiation as an uninterrupted non-decision time parameter independent of task-related variables. The countermanding race model does not account for the choice process. Here we show with new behavioral, neural and computational results that perceptual decision making of varying difficulty can be countermanded with invariant efficiency, that single prefrontal neurons instantiate both evidence accumulation and response inhibition, and that an interactive race between two GO and one STOP stochastic accumulator fits countermanding choice behavior. Thus, perceptual decision-making and response control, previously regarded as distinct mechanisms, are actually aspects of more flexible behavior supported by a common neural and computational mechanism. The identification of this aspect of decision-making with response production clarifies the component processes of decision-making.