scholarly journals Implementing Predictive Processing and Active Inference: Preliminary Steps and Results

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beren Millidge
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Inference Models ◽  
Perceptual Model ◽  
Challenging Tasks ◽  
Generalised Coordinates

Initial and preliminary implementations of predictive processing and active inference models are presented. These include the baseline hierarchical predictive coding models of (Friston 2003, 2005), and dynamical predictive coding models using generalised coordinates (Friston 2008, 2010, Buckley 2017). Additionally, we re-implement and experiment with the active inference thermostat presented in (Buckley 2017) and also implement an active inference agent with a hierarchical predictive coding perceptual model on the more challenging cart-pole task from OpanAI gym. We discuss the initial performance, capabilities, and limitations of these models in their preliminary stages and consider how they might be further scaled up to tackle more challenging tasks.

scholarly journals Combining Active Inference and Hierarchical Predictive Coding: A Tutorial Introduction and Case Study

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beren Millidge
Keyword(s):  
Free Energy ◽  
Reinforcement Learning ◽  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Action Selection ◽  
Proof Of Concept ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Energy Principle ◽  
Free Energy Principle ◽  
Perceptual Model

This paper combines the active inference formulation of action (Friston, 2009) with hierarchical predictive coding models (Friston, 2003) to provide a proof-of-concept implementation of an active inference agent able to solve a common reinforcement learning baseline -- the cart-pole environment in OpenAI gym. It demonstrates empirically that predictive coding and active inference approaches can be successfully scaled up to tasks more challenging than the mountain car (Friston 2009, 2012). We show that hierarchical predictive coding models can be learned from scratch during the task, and can successfully drive action selection via active inference. To our knowledge, it is the first implemented active inference agent to combine active inference with a hierarchical predictive coding perceptual model. We also provide a tutorial walk-through of the free-energy principle, hierarchical predictive coding, and active inference, including an in-depth derivation of our agent.

scholarly journals A tale of two densities: active inference is enactive inference

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 225-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxwell JD Ramstead ◽  
Michael D Kirchhoff ◽  
Karl J Friston
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Generative Models ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Energy Principle ◽  
Free Energy Principle ◽  
The One ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Selection Of

The aim of this article is to clarify how best to interpret some of the central constructs that underwrite the free-energy principle (FEP) – and its corollary, active inference – in theoretical neuroscience and biology: namely, the role that generative models and variational densities play in this theory. We argue that these constructs have been systematically misrepresented in the literature, because of the conflation between the FEP and active inference, on the one hand, and distinct (albeit closely related) Bayesian formulations, centred on the brain – variously known as predictive processing, predictive coding or the prediction error minimisation framework. More specifically, we examine two contrasting interpretations of these models: a structural representationalist interpretation and an enactive interpretation. We argue that the structural representationalist interpretation of generative and recognition models does not do justice to the role that these constructs play in active inference under the FEP. We propose an enactive interpretation of active inference – what might be called enactive inference. In active inference under the FEP, the generative and recognition models are best cast as realising inference and control – the self-organising, belief-guided selection of action policies – and do not have the properties ascribed by structural representationalists.

scholarly journals Active inference models do not contradict folk psychology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Smith ◽  
maxwell ramstead ◽  
Alex Kiefer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Folk Psychology ◽  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
Unified Theory ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Energy Principle ◽  
Inference Models ◽  
Free Energy Principle ◽  
Dark Room

Active inference offers a unified theory of perception, learning, and decision-making at computational and neural levels of description. In this article, we address the worry that active inference may be in tension with folk psychology because it does not include terms for desires (or other conative constructs) at the mathematical level of description. To resolve this concern, we first provide a brief review of the historical progression from predictive coding to active inference, enabling us to distinguish between active inference formulations of motor control (which need not have desires under folk psychology) and active inference formulations of decision processes (which do have desires within folk psychology). We then show that, despite a superficial tension when viewed at the mathematical level, the active inference formalism contains terms that are readily identifiable as encoding both the objects of desire and the strength of desire at the psychological level. We demonstrate this with simple simulations of an active inference agent motivated to leave a dark room for different reasons. Despite their consistency, we further show how active inference may increase the granularity of folk-psychological descriptions by highlighting distinctions between drives to seek information vs. reward – and how it may also offer more precise, quantitative folk-psychological predictions. Finally, we consider how the implicitly conative components of active inference may have partial analogues (i.e., “as if” desires) in other systems describable by the broader free energy principle to which it conforms.

scholarly journals The evolution of brain architectures for predictive coding and active inference

2021 ◽  
Vol 377 (1844) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Pezzulo ◽  
Thomas Parr ◽  
Karl Friston
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Control ◽  
Animal Species ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Generative Models ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Biological Regulation ◽  
Systems Neuroscience ◽  
Behavioural Repertoire

This article considers the evolution of brain architectures for predictive processing. We argue that brain mechanisms for predictive perception and action are not late evolutionary additions of advanced creatures like us. Rather, they emerged gradually from simpler predictive loops (e.g. autonomic and motor reflexes) that were a legacy from our earlier evolutionary ancestors—and were key to solving their fundamental problems of adaptive regulation. We characterize simpler-to-more-complex brains formally, in terms of generative models that include predictive loops of increasing hierarchical breadth and depth. These may start from a simple homeostatic motif and be elaborated during evolution in four main ways: these include the multimodal expansion of predictive control into an allostatic loop; its duplication to form multiple sensorimotor loops that expand an animal's behavioural repertoire; and the gradual endowment of generative models with hierarchical depth (to deal with aspects of the world that unfold at different spatial scales) and temporal depth (to select plans in a future-oriented manner). In turn, these elaborations underwrite the solution to biological regulation problems faced by increasingly sophisticated animals. Our proposal aligns neuroscientific theorising—about predictive processing—with evolutionary and comparative data on brain architectures in different animal species. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Systems neuroscience through the lens of evolutionary theory’.

scholarly journals Predictive Processing in Cognitive Robotics: A Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 1402-1432
Author(s):  
Alejandra Ciria ◽  
Guido Schillaci ◽  
Giovanni Pezzulo ◽  
Verena V. Hafner ◽  
Bruno Lara
Keyword(s):  
Prediction Error ◽  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Cognitive Robotics ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Perceptual Inference ◽  
Energy Principle ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Processing Framework

Abstract Predictive processing has become an influential framework in cognitive sciences. This framework turns the traditional view of perception upside down, claiming that the main flow of information processing is realized in a top-down, hierarchical manner. Furthermore, it aims at unifying perception, cognition, and action as a single inferential process. However, in the related literature, the predictive processing framework and its associated schemes, such as predictive coding, active inference, perceptual inference, and free-energy principle, tend to be used interchangeably. In the field of cognitive robotics, there is no clear-cut distinction on which schemes have been implemented and under which assumptions. In this letter, working definitions are set with the main aim of analyzing the state of the art in cognitive robotics research working under the predictive processing framework as well as some related nonrobotic models. The analysis suggests that, first, research in both cognitive robotics implementations and nonrobotic models needs to be extended to the study of how multiple exteroceptive modalities can be integrated into prediction error minimization schemes. Second, a relevant distinction found here is that cognitive robotics implementations tend to emphasize the learning of a generative model, while in nonrobotics models, it is almost absent. Third, despite the relevance for active inference, few cognitive robotics implementations examine the issues around control and whether it should result from the substitution of inverse models with proprioceptive predictions. Finally, limited attention has been placed on precision weighting and the tracking of prediction error dynamics. These mechanisms should help to explore more complex behaviors and tasks in cognitive robotics research under the predictive processing framework.

A challenge for predictive coding: Representational or experiential diversity?

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina G. Vilas ◽  
Lucia Melloni
Keyword(s):  
Brain Function ◽  
Predictive Coding ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Process Theory

Abstract To become a unifying theory of brain function, predictive processing (PP) must accommodate its rich representational diversity. Gilead et al. claim such diversity requires a multi-process theory, and thus is out of reach for PP, which postulates a universal canonical computation. We contend this argument and instead propose that PP fails to account for the experiential level of representations.

Activity, Agency, and Inner Speech Pathology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Swiney
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Sensory Input ◽  
The Other ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Inner Speech ◽  
Speech Pathology ◽  
Active Inference ◽  
Comparator Hypothesis

Over the last thirty years the comparator hypothesis has emerged as a prominent account of inner speech pathology. This chapter discusses a number of cognitive accounts broadly derived from this approach, highlighting the existence of two importantly distinct notions of inner speech in the literature; one as a prediction in the absence of sensory input, the other as an act with sensory consequences that are themselves predicted. Under earlier frameworks in which inner speech is described in the context of classic models of motor control, I argue that these two notions may be compatible, providing two routes to inner speech pathology. Under more recent accounts grounded in the architecture of Bayesian predictive processing, I argue that “active inference” approaches to action generation pose serious challenges to the plausibility of the latter notion of inner speech, while providing the former notion with rich explanatory possibilities for inner speech pathology.

Extending predictive processing to the body: Emotion as interoceptive inference

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anil K. Seth ◽  
Hugo D. Critchley
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Physiological Condition ◽  
Predictive Coding ◽  
The Body ◽  
Predictive Processing ◽  
Bayesian Brain ◽  
New View

AbstractThe Bayesian brain hypothesis provides an attractive unifying framework for perception, cognition, and action. We argue that the framework can also usefully integrate interoception, the sense of the internal physiological condition of the body. Our model of “interoceptive predictive coding” entails a new view of emotion as interoceptive inference and may account for a range of psychiatric disorders of selfhood.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document