Hybrid predictive coding: Inferring, fast and slow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictive coding is an influential model of cortical neural activity. It proposes that perceptual beliefs are furnished by sequentially minimising "prediction errors"-the differences between predicted and observed data. Implicit in this proposal is the idea that successful perception requires multiple cycles of neural activity. This is at odds with evidence that several aspects of visual perception-including complex forms of object recognition-arise from an initial "feedforward sweep" that occurs on fast timescales which preclude substantial recurrent activity. Here, we propose that the feedforward sweep can be understood as performing amortized inference (applying a learned function that maps directly from data to beliefs) and recurrent processing can be understood as performing iterative inference (sequentially updating neural activity in order to improve the accuracy of beliefs). We propose a hybrid predictive coding network that combines both iterative and amortized inference in a principled manner by describing both in terms of a dual optimization of a single objective function. We show that the resulting scheme can be implemented in a biologically plausible neural architecture that approximates Bayesian inference utilising local Hebbian update rules. We demonstrate that our hybrid predictive coding model combines the benefits of both amortized and iterative inference-obtaining rapid and computationally cheap perceptual inference for familiar data while maintaining the context-sensitivity, precision, and sample efficiency of iterative inference schemes. Moreover, we show how our model is inherently sensitive to its uncertainty and adaptively balances iterative and amortized inference to obtain accurate beliefs using minimum computational expense. Hybrid predictive coding offers a new perspective on the functional relevance of the feedforward and recurrent activity observed during visual perception and offers novel insights into distinct aspects of visual phenomenology.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".