CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 70Philosophy and Theoretical SciencePsychiatry, Mental Health, NeuroscienceCognitive Science and Education Research

A theory of consciousness from a theoretical computer science perspective: insights from the conscious turing machine

Open access
Blum, Lenore, Blum, Manuel·2022·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.2115934119PMC PMC9171770
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Significance: This paper provides evidence that a theoretical computer science (TCS) perspective can add to our understanding of consciousness by providing a simple framework for employing tools from computational complexity theory and machine learning. Just as the Turing machine is a simple model to define and explore computation, the Conscious Turing Machine (CTM) is a simple model to define and explore consciousness (and related concepts). The CTM is not a model of the brain or cognition, nor is it intended to be, but a simple substrate-independent computational model of (the admittedly complex concept of) consciousness. This paper is intended to introduce this approach, show its possibilities, and stimulate research in consciousness from a TCS perspective.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.2115934119

Cites

20 of 20 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?

  • The CTM is purely theoretical and has not been empirically evaluated.

    “We also note that the CTM is purely theoretical and has not been empirically evaluated.”

    From Design and evaluation of a global workspace agent embodied in a realistic multimodal environment (2024) · cites this paper as Blum and Blum, 2022

    The Abstract describes the CTM as a simple computational model, supporting the description of it as theoretical. In “Complexity Considerations” and “High-Level Explanations” (pages unavailable), the authors say they compare its explanations with psychology and neuroscience literature for high-level confirmation. Our copy does not establish the broader claim that the CTM has never been empirically evaluated. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 40

  1. [3]Psychol Conscious (Wash DC). https://psycnet.apa.org/PsycARTICLES/journal/cns/9/1. Accessed 11 May 2022.
  2. [9]G. Tononi, C. Koch, Consciousness: Here, there and everywhere? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 370, 20140167 (2015). 25823865 PMC4387509
  3. [10]S. Dehaene, J.-P. Changeux, Ongoing spontaneous activity controls access to consciousness: A neuronal model for inattentional blindness. PLoS Biol. 3, e141 (2005). 15819609 PMC1074751
  4. [13]S. Ginsburg, E. Jablonka, The Evolution of the Sensitive Soul (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2019).
  5. [14]B. J. Baars, A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1988).
  6. [15]S. Dehaene, Consciousness and the Brain: Deciphering How the Brain Codes Our Thoughts (Viking Press, New York, NY, 2014).
  7. [16]B. J. Baars, In the Theater of Consciousness (Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1997).
  8. [17]S. Dehaene, J.-P. Changeux, L. Naccache, “ The global neuronal workspace model of conscious access: From neuronal architectures to clinical applications” in Characterizing Consciousness: From Cognition to the Clinic? Research and Perspectives in Neurosciences, S. Dehaene, Y. Christen, Eds. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2011), pp. 55– 84.
  9. [18]M. S. A. Graziano, A. Guterstam, B. J. Bio, A. I. Wilterson, Toward a standard model of consciousness: Reconciling the attention schema, global workspace, higher-order thought, and illusionist theories. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 37, 155– 172 (2020). 31556341
  10. [19]A. Chella, A. Pipitone, A. Morin, F. Racy, Developing self-awareness in robots via inner speech. Front. Robot. AI 7, 16 (2020). 33501185 PMC7805855
  11. [22]J. Hohwy, A. Seth, Predictive processing as a systematic basis for identifying the neural correlates of consciousness. PsyArXiv [Preprint] (2020). https://psyarxiv.com/nd82g (Accessed 7 May 2022).
  12. [24]K. Friston, Learning and inference in the brain. Neural Netw. 16, 1325– 1352 (2003). 14622888
  13. [27]H. A. Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1969).
  14. [28]D. R. Reddy, Speech recognition by machine: A review. Proc. IEEE 64, 501– 531 (1976).
  15. [29]A. Newell, Unified Theories of Cognition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990).
  16. [32]A. M. Turing, On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 2, 230– 265 (1937).
  17. [39]S. A. Cook, “The complexity of theorem-proving procedures” in Proceedings of the Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '71 committee, Eds. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 1971), pp. 151–158.
  18. [40]R. M. Karp, “ Reducibility among combinatorial problems” in Complexity of Computer Computations, R. E. Miller, J. W. Thatcher, Eds. (Plenum, New York, NY, 1972), pp. 85– 103.
  19. [42]O. Goldreich, P, NP, and NP-Completeness (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2010).
  20. [45]A. C.-C. Yao, “Theory and applications of trapdoor functions” in Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS '82 committee, Eds. (IEEE Computer Society, 1982), pp. 80–91.
  21. [46]A. Lavazza, Why cognitive sciences do not prove that free will is an epiphenomenon. Front. Psychol. 10, 326 (2019). 30863339 PMC6399109
  22. [49]L. Blum, M. Blum, A theory of consciousness from a theoretical computer science perspective: Insights from the conscious Turing machine. arXiv [Preprint] (2022). https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13704 (Accessed 7 May 2022). PMC9171770 35594400 · arXiv
  23. [50]W. S. McCulloch, W. Pitts, A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 5, 115– 133 (1943). 2185863
  24. [52]I. Goodfellow, Y. Bengio, A. Courville, Deep Learning (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2016).
  25. [53]A. D. Milner, Is visual processing in the dorsal stream accessible to consciousness? Proc. Biol. Sci. 279, 2289– 2298 (2012). 22456882 PMC3350678
  26. [54]G. A. Miller, The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81– 97 (1956). 13310704
  27. [56]D. O. Hebb, The Organization of Behavior (Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1949). 10643472
  28. [57]C. N. Slobodchikoff, Chasing Doctor Dolittle: Learning the Language of Animals (St. Martin's Press, New York, NY, 2012).
  29. [58]M. L. Kringelbach, K. C. Berridge, The affective core of emotion: Linking pleasure, subjective well-being, and optimal metastability in the brain. Emot. Rev. 9, 191– 199 (2017). 28943891 PMC5604465
  30. [59]A. Blum, “Empirical support for winnow and weighted-majority algorithms: Results on a calendar scheduling domain” in Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Machine Learning, A. Prieditis, S. J. Russell, Eds. (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, 1995), pp. 64– 72.
  31. [61]A. Blum, J. Hopcroft, R. Kannan, Foundations of Data Science (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2020).
  32. [62]A. D. Baddeley, G. J. Hitch, “ Working memory” in The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, G. H. Bower, Ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1974), vol. 8, pp. 47– 89.
  33. [65]C. Rosen, The tangled roots of inner speech, voices and delusions. Psychiatry Res. 264, 281– 289 (2018). 29660570 PMC5972053
  34. [66]C. L. Striemer, C. S. Chapman, M. A. Goodale, “Real-time” obstacle avoidance in the absence of primary visual cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 15996– 16001 (2009). 19805240 PMC2747232
  35. [67]S. Ajina, H. Bridge, Blindsight relies on a functional connection between hMT+ and the lateral geniculate nucleus, not the pulvinar. PLoS Biol. 16, e2005769 (2018). 30044775 PMC6078309
  36. [68]M. S. Jensen, R. Yao, W. N. Street, D. J. Simons, Change blindness and inattentional blindness. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 2, 529– 546 (2011). 26302304
  37. [70]D. J. Simons, C. F. Chabris, Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28, 1059– 1074 (1999). 10694957
  38. [74]B. Herlin, S. Leu-Semenescu, C. Chaumereuil, I. Arnulf, Evidence that non-dreamers do dream: A REM sleep behaviour disorder model. J. Sleep Res. 24, 602– 609 (2015). 26307463
  39. [77]P. R. Corlett, S. V. Canavan, L. Nahum, F. Appah, P. T. Morgan, Dreams, reality and memory: Confabulations in lucid dreamers implicate reality-monitoring dysfunction in dream consciousness. Cogn. Neuropsychiatry 19, 540– 553 (2014). 25028078 PMC4160044
  40. [79]T. Horikawa, M. Tamaki, Y. Miyawaki, Y. Kamitani, Neural decoding of visual imagery during sleep. Science 340, 639– 642 (2013). 23558170

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blum, L., & Blum, M.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Blum, Lenore
  • Blum, Manuel
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2022-05-20
Volume
119
Issue
21
Pages
e2115934119-e2115934119
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.2115934119
PMC
PMC9171770
OpenAlex
W3186932523
Cited by
70
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 1
FWCI
13.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Psychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
Keywords
consciousness, Turing machines, global workspace theory, blindsight, inattentional blindness, change blindness, free will
MeSH terms
Brain, Cognition, Computers, Consciousness, Problem Solving

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