Fit cognitive drift-diffusion models (Ratcliff DDM) to reaction time and accuracy data with parameter estimation (drift rate, boundary separation, non-decision time), model comparison, and parameter recovery validation. Use when modeling binary decision-making with reaction time data, estimating cognitive parameters from experimental data, comparing sequential sampling model variants, or decomposing speed-accuracy tradeoff effects into latent cognitive components.
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add pjt222/agent-almanac --skill fit-drift-diffusion-model --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Fit Drift Diffusion Model?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/pjt222-fit-drift-diffusion-model-bfa237ea)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: fit-drift-diffusion-model
locale: caveman-ultra
source_locale: en
source_commit: 82c77053
translator: "Julius Brussee homage — caveman"
translation_date: "2026-04-24"
description: >
Fit cognitive drift-diffusion models (Ratcliff DDM) to reaction time and
accuracy data with parameter estimation (drift rate, boundary separation,
non-decision time), model comparison, and parameter recovery validation.
Use when modeling binary decision-making with reaction time data, estimating
cognitive parameters from experimental data, comparing sequential sampling
model variants, or decomposing speed-accuracy tradeoff effects into
latent cognitive components.
license: MIT
allowed-tools: Read Write Edit Bash Grep Glob
metadata:
author: Philipp Thoss
version: "1.0"
domain: diffusion
complexity: advanced
language: multi
tags: diffusion, ddm, drift-diffusion, cognitive, reaction-time, estimation
---
# Fit a Drift-Diffusion Model
Estimate DDM params from RT + accuracy, eval fit vs observed quantiles, compare variants, validate via parameter recovery.
## Use When
- Binary decision-making w/ RT data
- Estimate cognitive params (drift, boundary, non-decision) from exp
- Compare sequential sampling variants
- Validate DDM pipeline recovers known params
- Decompose speed-accuracy tradeoff → latent cognitive components
## In
- **Required**: RT data w/ accuracy (correct/error) per trial
- **Required**: Subject + condition IDs
- **Required**: DDM variant (basic 3-param, full 7-param, hierarchical)
- **Optional**: Prior distributions Bayesian (default weakly informative)
- **Optional**: N simulated datasets for recovery (default 100)
- **Optional**: RT filter bounds s (default 0.1 to 5.0)
## Do
### Step 1: Prepare Data
Clean + format raw behavioral for DDM.
1. Load + inspect columns:
```python
import pandas as pd
data = pd.read_csv("behavioral_data.csv")
required_columns = ["subject_id", "condition", "rt", "accuracy"]
assert all(col in data.columns for col in required_columns), \
f"Missing columns: {set(required_columns) - set(data.columns)}"
```
2. Filter outlier RTs:
```python
rt_lower = 0.1 # seconds
rt_upper = 5.0 # seconds
n_before = len(data)
data = data[(data["rt"] >= rt_lower) & (data["rt"] <= rt_upper)]
n_removed = n_before - len(data)
print(f"Removed {n_removed} trials ({100*n_removed/n_before:.1f}%) outside [{rt_lower}, {rt_upper}]s")
```
3. Summary stats per subject + condition:
```python
summary = data.groupby(["subject_id", "condition"]).agg(
n_trials=("rt", "count"),
mean_rt=("rt", "mean"),
accuracy=("accuracy", "mean")
).reset_index()
print(summary.describe())
```
4. Verify min trial counts (DDM needs data per cell):
```python
min_trials = summary["n_trials"].min()
assert min_trials >= 40, f"Minimum trials per cell is {min_trials}; need at least 40 for stable estimation"
```
→ Cleaned df, no outliers, ≥40 trials/cell, accuracy 0.50-0.99.
If err: low trial counts → collapse conditions or remove subjects w/ excessive missing. Accuracy ceiling (>0.99) or floor (<0.55) → DDM may not be identifiable, check task difficulty.
### Step 2: Select Variant
Complexity based on research q.
1. Candidate variants:
```python
model_variants = {
"basic": {
"params": ["v", "a", "t"],
"description": "Drift rate, boundary separation, non-decision time",
"free_params": 3
},
"full": {
"params": ["v", "a", "t", "z", "sv", "sz", "st"],
"description": "Basic + starting point bias, cross-trial variability",
"free_params": 7
},
"hddm": {
"params": ["v", "a", "t", "z"],
"description": "Hierarchical with group-level and subject-level parameters",
"free_params": "4 per subject + 8 group-level"
}
}
```
2. Select on data chars:
| Criterion | Basic (3-param) | Full (7-param) | Hierarchical |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trials per cell | 40-100 | 200+ | 40+ (pooled) |
| Subjects | Any | Any | 10+ |
| Research goal | Group effects | Individual fits | Both levels |
| Error RT shape | Symmetric | Asymmetric | Either |
3. Configure:
```python
selected_variant = "basic" # adjust based on criteria above
model_config = model_variants[selected_variant]
print(f"Selected: {selected_variant} ({model_config['free_params']} free parameters)")
print(f"Parameters: {', '.join(model_config['params'])}")
```
→ Variant selected w/ justification based trial counts, subjects, research q.
If err: unsure → start basic, add complexity only if residual diagnostics indicate misfit (err RT distribution mismatch).
### Step 3: Estimate
Fit via MLE or Bayesian.
1. MLE via `fast-dm` or Python `pyddm`:
```python
import pyddm
model = pyddm.Model(
drift=pyddm.DriftConstant(drift=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0, maxval=5)),
bound=pyddm.BoundConstant(B=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0.3, maxval=3.0)),
nondecision=pyddm.NonDecisionConstant(t=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0.1, maxval=0.5)),
overlay=pyddm.OverlayNonDecision(nondectime=pyddm.Fittable(minval=0.1, maxval=0.5)),
T_dur=5.0,
dt=0.001,
dx=0.001
)
```
2. Bayesian via HDDM:
```python
import hddm
hddm_model = hddm.HDDM(data, depends_on={"v": "condition"})
hddm_model.find_starting_values()
hddm_model.sample(5000, burn=1000, thin=2, dbname="traces.db", db="pickle")
```
3. Extract + store:
```python
params = hddm_model.get_group_estimates()
print("Group-level parameter estimates:")
for param_name, stats in params.items():
print(f" {param_name}: {stats['mean']:.3f} [{stats['2.5q']:.3f}, {stats['97.5q']:.3f}]")
```
4. Convergence (Bayesian only):
```python
from kabuki.analyze import gelman_rubin
convergence = gelman_rubin(hddm_model)
max_rhat = max(convergence.values())
print(f"Max Gelman-Rubin R-hat: {max_rhat:.3f}")
assert max_rhat < 1.1, f"Chains have not converged (R-hat = {max_rhat:.3f})"
```
→ Param estimates w/ SE or CI. Bayesian: R-hat < 1.1 all params. Drift typ 0.5-4.0, boundary 0.5-2.5, non-decision 0.15-0.50s.
If err: no convergence → (a) tighter bounds, (b) better starting via grid search, (c) longer chains + more burn-in. MLE hits boundary → misspecified.
### Step 4: Evaluate Fit
Compare predicted + observed RT via quantile.
1. Predicted RT quantiles:
```python
import numpy as np
quantiles = [0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9]
predicted_rts = model.simulate(n_trials=10000)
pred_quantiles = np.quantile(predicted_rts[predicted_rts > 0], quantiles) # correct
pred_quantiles_err = np.quantile(np.abs(predicted_rts[predicted_rts < 0]), quantiles) # error
```
2. Observed:
```python
obs_correct = data[data["accuracy"] == 1]["rt"]
obs_error = data[data["accuracy"] == 0]["rt"]
obs_quantiles = np.quantile(obs_correct, quantiles)
obs_quantiles_err = np.quantile(obs_error, quantiles) if len(obs_error) > 10 else None
```
3. QP plot:
```python
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize=(8, 6))
ax.scatter(obs_quantiles, quantiles, marker="o", label="Observed (correct)")
ax.scatter(pred_quantiles, quantiles, marker="x", label="Predicted (correct)")
if obs_quantiles_err is not None:
ax.scatter(obs_quantiles_err, quantiles, marker="o", facecolors="none", label="Observed (error)")
ax.scatter(pred_quantiles_err, quantiles, marker="x", label="Predicted (error)")
ax.set_xlabel("RT (s)")
ax.set_ylabel("Quantile")
ax.legend()
ax.set_title("Quantile-Probability Plot")
fig.savefig("qp_plot.png", dpi=150)
```
4. Fit statistic (chi-square quantile bins):
```python
from scipy.stats import chisquare
observed_proportions = np.diff(np.concatenate([[0], quantiles, [1]]))
predicted_proportions = np.diff(np.concatenate([[0], quantiles, [1]]))
chi2, p_value = chisquare(observed_proportions, predicted_proportions)
print(f"Chi-square fit: chi2={chi2:.3f}, p={p_value:.3f}")
```
→ QP shows predicted closely tracking observed for both correct + error. Chi-square non-sig (p > 0.05).
If err: systematically misses fast/slow quantiles → add cross-trial variability (sv, st). Err RT shape wrong → add starting point variability (sz). Refit extended.
### Step 5: Compare Models
Information criteria for variant selection.
1. Fit each + collect stats:
```python
model_results = {}
for variant_name in ["basic", "full"]:
fitted_model = fit_ddm(data, variant=variant_name)
model_results[variant_name] = {
"log_likelihood": fitted_model.log_likelihood,
"n_params": fitted_model.n_free_params,
"bic": fitted_model.bic,
"aic": fitted_model.aic
}
```
2. Compute + compare BIC:
```python
print("Model Comparison (BIC):")
print(f"{'Model':<15} {'LL':>10} {'k':>5} {'BIC':>12} {'delta_BIC':>12}")
print("-" * 55)
best_bic = min(r["bic"] for r in model_results.values())
for name, result in sorted(model_results.items(), key=lambda x: x[1]["bic"]):
delta = result["bic"] - best_bic
print(f"{name:<15} {result['log_likelihood']:>10.1f} {result['n_params']:>5} "
f"{result['bic']:>12.1f} {delta:>12.1f}")
```
3. Interpret BIC (Kass & Raftery, 1995):
BIC difference interpretation (Kass & Raftery, 1995):
- 0-2: Not worth mentioning
- 2-6: Positive evidence
- 6-10: Strong evidence
- `>10`: Very strong evidence
4. Bayesian → DIC or WAIC:
```python
dic = hddm_model.dic
print(f"DIC: {dic:.1f}")
```
→ Clear winner w/ BIC diff >6, or justified retain simpler when <2.
If err: indistinguishable (BIC diff <2) → simpler model (parsimony). Full wins big → ensure basic not misspecified due to data issues.
### Step 6: Parameter Recovery
Verify pipeline recovers known params from simulated.
1. Ground-truth grid:
```python
true_params = {
"v": [0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0],
"a": [0.6, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0],
"t": [0.2, 0.3, 0.4]
}
```
2. Simulate + re-estimate:
```python
from itertools import product
recovery_results = []
n_simulated_trials = 500 # match empirical trial count
for v_true, a_true, t_true in product(true_params["v"], true_params["a"], true_params["t"]):
simulated_data = simulate_ddm(v=v_true, a=a_true, t=t_true, n=n_simulated_trials)
fitted = fit_ddm(simulated_data, variant="basic")
recovery_results.append({
"v_true": v_true, "v_est": fitted.params["v"],
"a_true": a_true, "a_est": fitted.params["a"],
"t_true": t_true, "t_est": fitted.params["t"]
})
```
3. Recovery stats:
```python
recovery_df = pd.DataFrame(recovery_results)
for param in ["v", "a", "t"]:
correlation = recovery_df[f"{param}_true"].corr(recovery_df[f"{param}_est"])
bias = (recovery_df[f"{param}_est"] - recovery_df[f"{param}_true"]).mean()
rmse = np.sqrt(((recovery_df[f"{param}_est"] - recovery_df[f"{param}_true"])**2).mean())
print(f"{param}: r={correlation:.3f}, bias={bias:.4f}, RMSE={rmse:.4f}")
```
4. Recovery scatter plots:
```python
fig, axes = plt.subplots(1, 3, figsize=(15, 5))
for idx, param in enumerate(["v", "a", "t"]):
ax = axes[idx]
ax.scatter(recovery_df[f"{param}_true"], recovery_df[f"{param}_est"], alpha=0.5)
lims = [recovery_df[f"{param}_true"].min(), recovery_df[f"{param}_true"].max()]
ax.plot(lims, lims, "k--", label="Identity")
ax.set_xlabel(f"True {param}")
ax.set_ylabel(f"Estimated {param}")
ax.set_title(f"Recovery: {param} (r={recovery_df[f'{param}_true'].corr(recovery_df[f'{param}_est']):.3f})")
ax.legend()
fig.tight_layout()
fig.savefig("parameter_recovery.png", dpi=150)
```
→ Recovery correlations r > 0.85 all, bias near zero (< 5% range), RMSE acceptable.
If err: low recovery specific param → (a) insufficient trials → increase n_simulated_trials, (b) param tradeoffs — drift + boundary can trade off, fix one to test recoverability, (c) flat likelihood surface → reparameterize or Bayesian w/ informative priors.
## Check
- [ ] Input has RT + accuracy correct types
- [ ] Outlier filter removed <10%
- [ ] Every subject-condition cell ≥40 trials
- [ ] Param estimates plausible (v: 0-5, a: 0.3-3.0, t: 0.1-0.6)
- [ ] Convergence pass (R-hat < 1.1 Bayesian, gradient ~0 MLE)
- [ ] QP within 50ms of observed
- [ ] Comparison clear rank or justified parsimony
- [ ] Recovery correlations > 0.85 all free
- [ ] Recovery bias < 5% range
## Traps
- **Insufficient trials**: DDM data-hungry. <40 per cell → unstable + poor recovery. Always verify before fitting.
- **Ignore error RTs**: DDM jointly models correct + error. Discard err trials throws away boundary + starting point bias info.
- **No filter fast guesses**: <100ms likely anticipatory contaminants. Include → distort non-decision time.
- **Confuse variants**: Basic assumes no cross-trial variability. Err RTs systematically faster than correct → need full w/ sv + sz.
- **Overfit full**: 7-param can overfit sparse. Use BIC (penalizes complexity) not AIC for DDM selection.
- **Skip recovery**: W/o recovery validation → can't distinguish estimation bias from true exp effects. Always run before interpreting condition diffs.
## →
- `analyze-diffusion-dynamics` — mathematical analysis diffusion process
- `implement-diffusion-network` — generative diffusion sharing forward-process framework
- `design-experiment` — experimental design for DDM-quality data
- `write-testthat-tests` — testing estimation pipelines in R
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!