The cybernetic Bayesian brain : from interoceptive inference to sensorimotor contingencies
Open accessAbstract
Is there a single principle by which neural operations can account for perception, cognition, action, and even consciousness? A strong candidate is now taking shape in the form of “predictive processing”. On this theory, brains engage in predictive inference on the causes of sensory inputs by continuous minimization of prediction errors or informational “free energy”. Predictive processing can account, supposedly, not only for perception, but also for action and for the essential contribution of the body and environment in structuring sensorimotor interactions. In this paper I draw together some recent developments within predictive processing that involve predictive modelling of internal physiological states (interoceptive inference), and integration with “enactive” and “embodied” approaches to cognitive science (predictive perception of sensorimotor contingencies). The upshot is a development of predictive processing that originates, not in Helmholtzian perception-as-inference, but rather in 20th-century cybernetic principles that emphasized homeostasis and predictive control. This way of thinking leads to (i) a new view of emotion as active interoceptive inference; (ii) a common predictive framework linking experiences of body ownership, emotion, and exteroceptive perception; (iii) distinct interpretations of active inference as involving disruptive and disambiguatory—not just confirmatory—actions to test perceptual hypotheses; (iv) a neurocognitive operationalization of t…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
IWMT's cybernetic grounding of IIT and GNWT within FEP-AI may help explain why there may be "something that it is like" to be a maximal complex, and provide causal connections between consciousness and action, thus providing foundations for the emergence of agency.
“Thus, IWMT's cybernetic (Seth, 2015; Safron, 2019c) grounding of IIT and GNWT within FEP-AI may not only help explain why there may be “something that it is like” to be a maximal complex (entailing a MICS and MICE repertoires), but also provide causal connections between consciousness and action, thus providing foundations for the emergence of agency (Tononi, 2013).”
From An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness (2020) · cites this paper as Seth, 2015
Nervous systems are merely a special case of generative modeling, where all systems are models in their very existence, but where some systems also have sub-models that function as cybernetic controllers.
“By this account, nervous systems are merely a (very) special case of generative modeling, where all systems are models in their very existence, but where some systems also have sub-models that function as cybernetic controllers (Stepp and Turvey, 2010; Seth, 2015; Seth and Tsakiris, 2018).”
From An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness (2020) · cites this paper as Seth, 2015
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Allostatic Self-efficacy: A Metacognitive Theory of Dyshomeostasis-Induced Fatigue and Depression
Stephan, K. E., Manjaly, Z. M., Mathys, C. D., Weber, L. A. E., Paliwal, S., Gard, T., Tittgemeyer, M., Fleming, S. M., Haker, H., Seth, A. K., et al. (2016) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00550 · Cited by 437 · see citing works
Self-citationThe sense of should: A biologically-based framework for modeling social pressure
Theriault, J. E., Young, L., & Barrett, L. F. (2021) · Physics of Life Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2020.01.004 · Cited by 201 · see citing works
Safron, A. (2020) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2020.00030 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Consciousness beyond the human case
LeDoux, J., Birch, J., Andrews, K., Clayton, N. S., Daw, N. D., Frith, C., Lau, H., Peters, M. A. K., Schneider, S., Seth, A., et al. (2023) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2023.06.067 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Self-citationFabry, R. E., & Kukkonen, K. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02648 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Deane, G. (2021) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niab024 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
- Authors
- Seth, A. K.
- Corresponding author
- Seth, Anil K.
- ORCID
- Seth, Anil K.
- Venue
- MIND Group
- Publisher
- MIND Group
- Published
- 2015
- OpenAlex
- W1456772534
- Cited by
- 239
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11
- FWCI
- 44.39
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Gutenberg Open Science (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Gutenberg Open Science
- Funders
- European Commission (258749)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
- Keywords
- predictive processing, active inference, interoceptive inference, cybernetics, free energy principle, sensorimotor contingencies, embodiment, enaction, emotions, body ownership, perceptual presence, homeostasis, predictive control, consciousness, perception
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