Cited by 665Action Observation and SynchronizationEmbodied and Extended CognitionFree Will and Agency

Action understanding and active inference

Open access
Friston, Karl, Mattout, Jérémie, Kilner, James·2011·Biological Cybernetics

Abstract

We have suggested that the mirror-neuron system might be usefully understood as implementing Bayes-optimal perception of actions emitted by oneself or others. To substantiate this claim, we present neuronal simulations that show the same representations can prescribe motor behavior and encode motor intentions during action-observation. These simulations are based on the free-energy formulation of active inference, which is formally related to predictive coding. In this scheme, (generalised) states of the world are represented as trajectories. When these states include motor trajectories they implicitly entail intentions (future motor states). Optimizing the representation of these intentions enables predictive coding in a prospective sense. Crucially, the same generative models used to make predictions can be deployed to predict the actions of self or others by simply changing the bias or precision (i.e. attention) afforded to proprioceptive signals. We illustrate these points using simulations of handwriting to illustrate neuronally plausible generation and recognition of itinerant (wandering) motor trajectories. We then use the same simulations to produce synthetic electrophysiological responses to violations of intentional expectations. Our results affirm that a Bayes-optimal approach provides a principled framework, which accommodates current thinking about the mirror-neuron system. Furthermore, it endorses the general formulation of action as active inference.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00422-011-0424-z

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cortical signals that drive movement are descending predictions about the proprioceptive consequences of movement and are therefore better considered as corollary discharge as opposed to efference copy.

    “In other words, cortical signals that drive movement are descending predictions about the proprioceptive consequences of movement and are therefore better considered as corollary discharge (the predictions of the sensory consequences of movement) as opposed to efference copy (copies of the motor commands used to form corollary discharge).”

    From The free-energy self: a predictive coding account of self-recognition (2014) · cites this paper as Friston et al., 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Tsodyks M Attractor neural network models of spatial maps in hippocampus Hippocampus 1999 9 4 481 489 10495029

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Friston, K., Mattout, J., & Kilner, J.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Friston, Karl
Venue
Biological Cybernetics
Published
2011-02
Volume
104
Issue
1-2
Pages
137-160
ISSN
  • 0340-1200 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0770
OpenAlex
W2111947800
Cited by
665
References
96
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 29
FWCI
44.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biological Cybernetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (081048, 088130)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
mirror neuron system, action understanding, active inference, free energy principle, predictive coding, action observation, proprioception, attention, handwriting, electrophysiological responses, generative models
MeSH terms
Bayes Theorem, Cybernetics, Handwriting, Humans, Models, Neurological, Motor Neurons, Perception, Psychomotor Performance, Sensation, Nonlinear Dynamics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review