Search

When someone masters a skill, their performance looks to us like second nature: it looks as if their actions are performed smoothly without explicit, knowledge-driven, online monitoring of their performance. Contemporary computational models in motor control theory, however, are instructionist. That is, they cast skilful performance as a knowledge-driven process, one that is driven by explicit motor representations of the action to be performed skillfully, which harness instructions for performance. Optimal control theory, a popular representative of such approaches, casts skillful performance as the execution of motor commands, the deliverances of a motor control system implemented by separable forward and inverse models that work in tandem with a state estimator to control the motor plant. These models rest on the principle that motor control is realized by the concerted action of separate modular subsystems, which transform an explicit motor representation into a sequence of physical movements. This paper aims to show the limitations of such instructionist approaches to skillful performance. Specifically, we address whether the assumption of modular knowledge-driven motor control in optimal control theory (based on motor commands computed by separable state estimators, forward models, and inverse models) is warranted. The first section of this paper examines the instructionist assumption, according to which skillful performance consists in the execution of instructions invested in motor representations. The second and third sections characterize the implementation of motor representations as motor commands, with a special focus on formulations from optimal control theory. The final sections of this paper examine predictive coding and active inference – behavioral modeling frameworks that descend, but are distinct, from optimal control theory – and argue that the instructionist assumption is ill-motivated in light of new developments in motor control theory, which cast motor control and motor planning as a form of (active) inference. more...

The 35 commentaries cover a wide range of topics and take many different stances on the issues explored by the target article. We have organised our response to the commentaries around three central questions: Are Friston blankets just Pearl blankets? What ontological and metaphysical commitments are implied by the use of Friston blankets? What kind of explanatory work are Friston blankets capable of? We conclude our reply with a short critical reflection on the indiscriminate use of both Markov blankets and the free energy principle. more...

The free energy principle, an influential framework in computational neuroscience and theoretical neurobiology, starts from the assumption that living systems ensure adaptive exchanges with their environment by minimizing the objective function of variational free energy. Following this premise, it claims to deliver a promising integration of the life sciences. In recent work, Markov blankets, one of the central constructs of the free energy principle, have been applied to resolve debates central to philosophy (such as demarcating the boundaries of the mind). The aim of this paper is twofold. First, we trace the development of Markov blankets starting from their standard application in Bayesian networks, via variational inference, to their use in the literature on active inference. We then identify a persistent confusion in the literature between the formal use of Markov blankets as an epistemic tool for Bayesian inference, and their novel metaphysical use in the free energy framework to demarcate the physical boundary between an agent and its environment. Consequently, we propose to distinguish between “Pearl blankets” to refer to the original epistemic use of Markov blankets and “Friston blankets” to refer to the new metaphysical construct. Second, we use this distinction to critically assess claims resting on the application of Markov blankets to philosophical problems. We suggest that this literature would do well in differentiating between two different research programmes: “inference with a model” and “inference within a model.” Only the latter is capable of doing metaphysical work with Markov blankets, but requires additional philosophical premises and cannot be justified by an appeal to the success of the mathematical framework alone. more...

Active inference introduces a theory describing action-perception loops via the minimisation of variational (and expected) free energy or, under simplifying assumptions, (weighted) prediction error. Recently, active inference has been proposed as part of a new and unifying framework in the cognitive sciences: predictive processing. Predictive processing is often associated with traditional computational theories of the mind, strongly relying on internal representations presented in the form of generative models thought to explain different functions of living and cognitive systems. In this work, we introduce an active inference formulation of the Watt centrifugal governor, a system often portrayed as the canonical "anti-representational" metaphor for cognition. We identify a generative model of a steam engine for the governor, and derive a set of equations describing "perception" and "action" processes as a form of prediction error minimisation. In doing so, we firstly challenge the idea of generative models as explicit internal representations for cognitive systems, suggesting that such models serve only as implicit descriptions for an observer. Secondly, we consider current proposals of predictive processing as a theory of cognition, focusing on some of its potential shortcomings and in particular on the idea that virtually any system admits a description in terms of prediction error minimisation, suggesting that this theory may offer limited explanatory power for cognitive systems. Finally, as a silver lining we emphasise the instrumental role this framework can nonetheless play as a mathematical tool for modelling cognitive architectures interpreted in terms of Bayesian (active) inference., Comment: Accepted at ALife 2020 more...

The Bayesian brain hypothesis, predictive processing and variational free energy minimisation are typically used to describe perceptual processes based on accurate generative models of the world. However, generative models need not be veridical representations of the environment. We suggest that they can (and should) be used to describe sensorimotor relationships relevant for behaviour rather than precise accounts of the world., Commentary on Brette (2019) https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X19000049 more...

In the past few decades, probabilistic interpretations of brain functions have become widespread in cognitive science and neuroscience. In particular, the free energy principle and active inference are increasingly popular theories of cognitive functions that claim to offer a unified understanding of life and cognition within a general mathematical framework derived from information and control theory, and statistical mechanics. However, we argue that if the active inference proposal is to be taken as a general process theory for biological systems, it is necessary to understand how it relates to existing control theoretical approaches routinely used to study and explain biological systems. For example, recently, PID control has been shown to be implemented in simple molecular systems and is becoming a popular mechanistic explanation of behaviours such as chemotaxis in bacteria and amoebae, and robust adaptation in biochemical networks. In this work, we will show how PID controllers can fit a more general theory of life and cognition under the principle of (variational) free energy minimisation when using approximate linear generative models of the world. This more general interpretation provides also a new perspective on traditional problems of PID controllers such as parameter tuning as well as the need to balance performances and robustness conditions of a controller. Specifically, we then show how these problems can be understood in terms of the optimisation of the precisions (inverse variances) modulating different prediction errors in the free energy functional. more...

The free energy principle describes cognitive functions such as perception, action, learning and attention in terms of surprisal minimisation. Under simplifying assumptions, agents are depicted as systems minimising a weighted sum of prediction errors encoding the mismatch between incoming sensations and an agent's predictions about such sensations. The ``dark room'' is defined as a state that an agent would occupy should it only look to minimise this sum of prediction errors. This (paradoxical) state emerges as the contrast between the attempts to describe the richness of human and animal behaviour in terms of surprisal minimisation and the trivial solution of a dark room, where the complete lack of sensory stimuli would provide the easiest way to minimise prediction errors, i.e., to be in a perfectly predictable state of darkness with no incoming stimuli. Using a process theory derived from the free energy principle, active inference, we investigate with an agent-based model the meaning of the dark room problem and discuss some of its implications for natural and artificial systems. In this set up, we propose that the presence of this paradox is primarily due to the long-standing belief that agents should encode accurate world models, typical of traditional (computational) theories of cognition. more...

In psychology and neuroscience it is common to describe cognitive systems as input/output devices where perceptual and motor functions are implemented in a purely feedforward, open-loop fashion. On this view, perception and action are often seen as encapsulated modules with limited interaction between them. While embodied and enactive approaches to cognitive science have challenged the idealisation of the brain as an input/output device, we argue that even the more recent attempts to model systems using closed-loop architectures still heavily rely on a strong separation between motor and perceptual functions. Previously, we have suggested that the mainstream notion of modularity strongly resonates with the separation principle of control theory. In this work we present a minimal model of a sensorimotor loop implementing an architecture based on the separation principle. We link this to popular formulations of perception and action in the cognitive sciences, and show its limitations when, for instance, external forces are not modelled by an agent. These forces can be seen as variables that an agent cannot directly control, i.e., a perturbation from the environment or an interference caused by other agents. As an alternative approach inspired by embodied cognitive science, we then propose a nonmodular architecture based on the active inference framework. We demonstrate the robustness of this architecture to unknown external inputs and show that the mechanism with which this is achieved in linear models is equivalent to integral control., Comment: Accepted at IJCNN 2019 more...

Active inference is emerging as a possible unifying theory of perception and action in cognitive and computational neuroscience. On this theory, perception is a process of inferring the causes of sensory data by minimising the error between actual sensations and those predicted by an inner \emph{generative} (probabilistic) model. Action on the other hand is drawn as a process that modifies the world such that the consequent sensory input meets expectations encoded in the same internal model. These two processes, inferring properties of the world and inferring actions needed to meet expectations, close the sensory/motor loop and suggest a deep symmetry between action and perception. In this work we present a simple agent-based model inspired by this new theory that offers insights on some of its central ideas. Previous implementations of active inference have typically examined a "perception-oriented" view of this theory, assuming that agents are endowed with a detailed generative model of their surrounding environment. In contrast, we present an "action-oriented" solution showing how adaptive behaviour can emerge even when agents operate with a simple model which bears little resemblance to their environment. We examine how various parameters of this formulation allow phototaxis and present an example of a different, "pathological" behaviour., 8 pages, 3 figures, accepted at ECAL (European Conference on Artificial Life) 2017, Lyon, France more...