MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neural and phenotypic representation under the free-energy principle

2020· preprint· en· W3047862968 on OpenAlexaff
Maxwell J. D. Ramstead, Casper Hesp, Alec Tschantz, Ryan Smith, Axel Constant, Karl Friston

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekUniversity of SussexWellcome TrustWilliam K. Warren Foundation
KeywordsInferenceComputer scienceENCODETheoretical computer scienceProbabilistic logicPopulationArtificial intelligenceFree energy principleGenerative modelMarkov processMathematicsMachine learningGenerative grammar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to leverage the free-energy principle and its corollary process theory, active inference, to develop a generic, generalizable model of the representational capacities of living creatures; that is, a theory of phenotypic representation. Given their ubiquity, we are concerned with distributed forms of representation (e.g., population codes), whereby patterns of ensemble activity in living tissue come to represent the causes of sensory input or data. The active inference framework rests on the Markov blanket formalism, which allows us to partition systems of interest, such as biological systems, into internal states, external states, and the blanket (active and sensory) states that render internal and external states conditionally independent of each other. In this framework, the representational capacity of living creatures emerges as a consequence of their Markovian structure and nonequilibrium dynamics, which together entail a dual-aspect information geometry. This entails a modest representational capacity: internal states have an intrinsic information geometry that describes their trajectory over time in state space, as well as an extrinsic information geometry that allows internal states to encode (the parameters of) probabilistic beliefs about (fictive) external states. Building on this, we describe here how, in an automatic and emergent manner, information about stimuli can come to be encoded by groups of neurons bound by a Markov blanket; what is known as the neuronal packet hypothesis. As a concrete demonstration of this type of emergent representation, we present numerical simulations showing that self-organizing ensembles of active inference agents sharing the right kind of probabilistic generative model are able to encode recoverable information about a stimulus array.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.176
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroscience & Biobehavioral ReviewsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207