Showing 1–9 of 9 results for author: Friston, K J

Active Inference and Intentional Behaviour

Authors: Karl J. Friston, Tommaso Salvatori, Takuya Isomura, Alexander Tschantz, Alex Kiefer, Tim Verbelen, Magnus Koudahl, Aswin Paul, Thomas Parr, Adeel Razi, Brett Kagan, Christopher L. Buckley, Maxwell J. D. Ramstead

Abstract: Recent advances in theoretical biology suggest that basal cognition and sentient behaviour are emergent properties of in vitro cell cultures and neuronal networks, respectively. Such neuronal networks spontaneously learn structured behaviours in the absence of reward or reinforcement. In this paper, we characterise this kind of self-organisation through the lens of the free energy principle, i.e.,… ▽ More Recent advances in theoretical biology suggest that basal cognition and sentient behaviour are emergent properties of in vitro cell cultures and neuronal networks, respectively. Such neuronal networks spontaneously learn structured behaviours in the absence of reward or reinforcement. In this paper, we characterise this kind of self-organisation through the lens of the free energy principle, i.e., as self-evidencing. We do this by first discussing the definitions of reactive and sentient behaviour in the setting of active inference, which describes the behaviour of agents that model the consequences of their actions. We then introduce a formal account of intentional behaviour, that describes agents as driven by a preferred endpoint or goal in latent state-spaces. We then investigate these forms of (reactive, sentient, and intentional) behaviour using simulations. First, we simulate the aforementioned in vitro experiments, in which neuronal cultures spontaneously learn to play Pong, by implementing nested, free energy minimising processes. The simulations are then used to deconstruct the ensuing predictive behaviour, leading to the distinction between merely reactive, sentient, and intentional behaviour, with the latter formalised in terms of inductive planning. This distinction is further studied using simple machine learning benchmarks (navigation in a grid world and the Tower of Hanoi problem), that show how quickly and efficiently adaptive behaviour emerges under an inductive form of active inference. △ Less

Submitted 16 December, 2023; v1 submitted 6 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: 33 pages, 9 figures

Supervised structure learning

Authors: Karl J. Friston, Lancelot Da Costa, Alexander Tschantz, Alex Kiefer, Tommaso Salvatori, Victorita Neacsu, Magnus Koudahl, Conor Heins, Noor Sajid, Dimitrije Markovic, Thomas Parr, Tim Verbelen, Christopher L Buckley

Abstract: This paper concerns structure learning or discovery of discrete generative models. It focuses on Bayesian model selection and the assimilation of training data or content, with a special emphasis on the order in which data are ingested. A key move - in the ensuing schemes - is to place priors on the selection of models, based upon expected free energy. In this setting, expected free energy reduces… ▽ More This paper concerns structure learning or discovery of discrete generative models. It focuses on Bayesian model selection and the assimilation of training data or content, with a special emphasis on the order in which data are ingested. A key move - in the ensuing schemes - is to place priors on the selection of models, based upon expected free energy. In this setting, expected free energy reduces to a constrained mutual information, where the constraints inherit from priors over outcomes (i.e., preferred outcomes). The resulting scheme is first used to perform image classification on the MNIST dataset to illustrate the basic idea, and then tested on a more challenging problem of discovering models with dynamics, using a simple sprite-based visual disentanglement paradigm and the Tower of Hanoi (cf., blocks world) problem. In these examples, generative models are constructed autodidactically to recover (i.e., disentangle) the factorial structure of latent states - and their characteristic paths or dynamics. △ Less

Submitted 16 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Bayesian sparsification for deep neural networks with Bayesian model reduction

Authors: Dimitrije Marković, Karl J. Friston, Stefan J. Kiebel

Abstract: Deep learning's immense capabilities are often constrained by the complexity of its models, leading to an increasing demand for effective sparsification techniques. Bayesian sparsification for deep learning emerges as a crucial approach, facilitating the design of models that are both computationally efficient and competitive in terms of performance across various deep learning applications. The s… ▽ More Deep learning's immense capabilities are often constrained by the complexity of its models, leading to an increasing demand for effective sparsification techniques. Bayesian sparsification for deep learning emerges as a crucial approach, facilitating the design of models that are both computationally efficient and competitive in terms of performance across various deep learning applications. The state-of-the-art -- in Bayesian sparsification of deep neural networks -- combines structural shrinkage priors on model weights with an approximate inference scheme based on stochastic variational inference. However, model inversion of the full generative model is exceptionally computationally demanding, especially when compared to standard deep learning of point estimates. In this context, we advocate for the use of Bayesian model reduction (BMR) as a more efficient alternative for pruning of model weights. As a generalization of the Savage-Dickey ratio, BMR allows a post-hoc elimination of redundant model weights based on the posterior estimates under a straightforward (non-hierarchical) generative model. Our comparative study highlights the advantages of the BMR method relative to established approaches based on hierarchical horseshoe priors over model weights. We illustrate the potential of BMR across various deep learning architectures, from classical networks like LeNet to modern frameworks such as Vision Transformers and MLP-Mixers. △ Less

Submitted 27 October, 2023; v1 submitted 21 September, 2023; originally announced September 2023.

MSC Class: 68T07

Life-inspired Interoceptive Artificial Intelligence for Autonomous and Adaptive Agents

Authors: Sungwoo Lee, Younghyun Oh, Hyunhoe An, Hyebhin Yoon, Karl J. Friston, Seok Jun Hong, Choong-Wan Woo

Abstract: Building autonomous --- i.e., choosing goals based on one's needs -- and adaptive -- i.e., surviving in ever-changing environments -- agents has been a holy grail of artificial intelligence (AI). A living organism is a prime example of such an agent, offering important lessons about adaptive autonomy. Here, we focus on interoception, a process of monitoring one's internal environment to keep it wi… ▽ More Building autonomous --- i.e., choosing goals based on one's needs -- and adaptive -- i.e., surviving in ever-changing environments -- agents has been a holy grail of artificial intelligence (AI). A living organism is a prime example of such an agent, offering important lessons about adaptive autonomy. Here, we focus on interoception, a process of monitoring one's internal environment to keep it within certain bounds, which underwrites the survival of an organism. To develop AI with interoception, we need to factorize the state variables representing internal environments from external environments and adopt life-inspired mathematical properties of internal environment states. This paper offers a new perspective on how interoception can help build autonomous and adaptive agents by integrating the legacy of cybernetics with recent advances in theories of life, reinforcement learning, and neuroscience. △ Less

Submitted 12 September, 2023; originally announced September 2023.

Comments: 28 pages, 4 figures, 3 boxes

ACM Class: I.2.0

Designing Ecosystems of Intelligence from First Principles

Authors: Karl J Friston, Maxwell J D Ramstead, Alex B Kiefer, Alexander Tschantz, Christopher L Buckley, Mahault Albarracin, Riddhi J Pitliya, Conor Heins, Brennan Klein, Beren Millidge, Dalton A R Sakthivadivel, Toby St Clere Smithe, Magnus Koudahl, Safae Essafi Tremblay, Capm Petersen, Kaiser Fung, Jason G Fox, Steven Swanson, Dan Mapes, Gabriel René

Abstract: This white paper lays out a vision of research and development in the field of artificial intelligence for the next decade (and beyond). Its denouement is a cyber-physical ecosystem of natural and synthetic sense-making, in which humans are integral participants -- what we call ''shared intelligence''. This vision is premised on active inference, a formulation of adaptive behavior that can be read… ▽ More This white paper lays out a vision of research and development in the field of artificial intelligence for the next decade (and beyond). Its denouement is a cyber-physical ecosystem of natural and synthetic sense-making, in which humans are integral participants -- what we call ''shared intelligence''. This vision is premised on active inference, a formulation of adaptive behavior that can be read as a physics of intelligence, and which inherits from the physics of self-organization. In this context, we understand intelligence as the capacity to accumulate evidence for a generative model of one's sensed world -- also known as self-evidencing. Formally, this corresponds to maximizing (Bayesian) model evidence, via belief updating over several scales: i.e., inference, learning, and model selection. Operationally, this self-evidencing can be realized via (variational) message passing or belief propagation on a factor graph. Crucially, active inference foregrounds an existential imperative of intelligent systems; namely, curiosity or the resolution of uncertainty. This same imperative underwrites belief sharing in ensembles of agents, in which certain aspects (i.e., factors) of each agent's generative world model provide a common ground or frame of reference. Active inference plays a foundational role in this ecology of belief sharing -- leading to a formal account of collective intelligence that rests on shared narratives and goals. We also consider the kinds of communication protocols that must be developed to enable such an ecosystem of intelligences and motivate the development of a shared hyper-spatial modeling language and transaction protocol, as a first -- and key -- step towards such an ecology. △ Less

Submitted 11 January, 2024; v1 submitted 2 December, 2022; originally announced December 2022.

Comments: 23+18 pages, one figure, one six page appendix

Journal ref: Collective Intelligence, 3(1), 2024

Predictive coding and stochastic resonance as fundamental principles of auditory perception

Authors: Achim Schilling, William Sedley, Richard Gerum, Claus Metzner, Konstantin Tziridis, Andreas Maier, Holger Schulze, Fan-Gang Zeng, Karl J. Friston, Patrick Krauss

Abstract: How is information processed in the brain during perception? Mechanistic insight is achieved only when experiments are employed to test formal or computational models. In analogy to lesion studies, phantom perception may serve as a vehicle to understand the fundamental processing principles underlying auditory perception. With a special focus on tinnitus -- as the prime example of auditory phantom… ▽ More How is information processed in the brain during perception? Mechanistic insight is achieved only when experiments are employed to test formal or computational models. In analogy to lesion studies, phantom perception may serve as a vehicle to understand the fundamental processing principles underlying auditory perception. With a special focus on tinnitus -- as the prime example of auditory phantom perception -- we review recent work at the intersection of artificial intelligence, psychology, and neuroscience. In particular, we discuss why everyone with tinnitus suffers from hearing loss, but not everyone with hearing loss suffers from tinnitus. We argue that the increase of sensory precision due to Bayesian inference could be caused by intrinsic neural noise and lead to a prediction error in the cerebral cortex. Hence, two fundamental processing principles - being ubiquitous in the brain - provide the most explanatory power for the emergence of tinnitus: predictive coding as a top-down, and stochastic resonance as a complementary bottom-up mechanism. We conclude that both principles play a crucial role in healthy auditory perception. △ Less

Submitted 23 May, 2022; v1 submitted 7 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2010.01914

Trust as Extended Control: Active Inference and User Feedback During Human-Robot Collaboration

Authors: Felix Schoeller, Mark Miller, Roy Salomon, Karl J. Friston

Abstract: To interact seamlessly with robots, users must infer the causes of a robot's behavior and be confident about that inference. Hence, trust is a necessary condition for human-robot collaboration (HRC). Despite its crucial role, it is largely unknown how trust emerges, develops, and supports human interactions with nonhuman artefacts. Here, we review the literature on trust, human-robot interaction,… ▽ More To interact seamlessly with robots, users must infer the causes of a robot's behavior and be confident about that inference. Hence, trust is a necessary condition for human-robot collaboration (HRC). Despite its crucial role, it is largely unknown how trust emerges, develops, and supports human interactions with nonhuman artefacts. Here, we review the literature on trust, human-robot interaction, human-robot collaboration, and human interaction at large. Early models of trust suggest that trust entails a trade-off between benevolence and competence, while studies of human-to-human interaction emphasize the role of shared behavior and mutual knowledge in the gradual building of trust. We then introduce a model of trust as an agent's best explanation for reliable sensory exchange with an extended motor plant or partner. This model is based on the cognitive neuroscience of active inference and suggests that, in the context of HRC, trust can be cast in terms of virtual control over an artificial agent. In this setting, interactive feedback becomes a necessary component of the trustor's perception-action cycle. The resulting model has important implications for understanding human-robot interaction and collaboration, as it allows the traditional determinants of human trust to be defined in terms of active inference, information exchange and empowerment. Furthermore, this model suggests that boredom and surprise may be used as markers for under and over-reliance on the system. Finally, we examine the role of shared behavior in the genesis of trust, especially in the context of dyadic collaboration, suggesting important consequences for the acceptability and design of human-robot collaborative systems. △ Less

Submitted 22 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Active inference: demystified and compared

Authors: Noor Sajid, Philip J. Ball, Thomas Parr, Karl J. Friston

Abstract: Active inference is a first principle account of how autonomous agents operate in dynamic, non-stationary environments. This problem is also considered in reinforcement learning (RL), but limited work exists on comparing the two approaches on the same discrete-state environments. In this paper, we provide: 1) an accessible overview of the discrete-state formulation of active inference, highlightin… ▽ More Active inference is a first principle account of how autonomous agents operate in dynamic, non-stationary environments. This problem is also considered in reinforcement learning (RL), but limited work exists on comparing the two approaches on the same discrete-state environments. In this paper, we provide: 1) an accessible overview of the discrete-state formulation of active inference, highlighting natural behaviors in active inference that are generally engineered in RL; 2) an explicit discrete-state comparison between active inference and RL on an OpenAI gym baseline. We begin by providing a condensed overview of the active inference literature, in particular viewing the various natural behaviors of active inference agents through the lens of RL. We show that by operating in a pure belief-based setting, active inference agents can carry out epistemic exploration, and account for uncertainty about their environment in a Bayes-optimal fashion. Furthermore, we show that the reliance on an explicit reward signal in RL is removed in active inference, where reward can simply be treated as another observation; even in the total absence of rewards, agent behaviors are learned through preference learning. We make these properties explicit by showing two scenarios in which active inference agents can infer behaviors in reward-free environments compared to both Q-learning and Bayesian model-based RL agents; by placing zero prior preferences over rewards and by learning the prior preferences over the observations corresponding to reward. We conclude by noting that this formalism can be applied to more complex settings if appropriate generative models can be formulated. In short, we aim to demystify the behavior of active inference agents by presenting an accessible discrete state-space and time formulation, and demonstrate these behaviors in a OpenAI gym environment, alongside RL agents. △ Less

Submitted 30 October, 2020; v1 submitted 24 September, 2019; originally announced September 2019.

Journal ref: Neural Computation 2021

How Robust are Deep Neural Networks?

Authors: Biswa Sengupta, Karl J. Friston

Abstract: Convolutional and Recurrent, deep neural networks have been successful in machine learning systems for computer vision, reinforcement learning, and other allied fields. However, the robustness of such neural networks is seldom apprised, especially after high classification accuracy has been attained. In this paper, we evaluate the robustness of three recurrent neural networks to tiny perturbations… ▽ More Convolutional and Recurrent, deep neural networks have been successful in machine learning systems for computer vision, reinforcement learning, and other allied fields. However, the robustness of such neural networks is seldom apprised, especially after high classification accuracy has been attained. In this paper, we evaluate the robustness of three recurrent neural networks to tiny perturbations, on three widely used datasets, to argue that high accuracy does not always mean a stable and a robust (to bounded perturbations, adversarial attacks, etc.) system. Especially, normalizing the spectrum of the discrete recurrent network to bound the spectrum (using power method, Rayleigh quotient, etc.) on a unit disk produces stable, albeit highly non-robust neural networks. Furthermore, using the $ε$-pseudo-spectrum, we show that training of recurrent networks, say using gradient-based methods, often result in non-normal matrices that may or may not be diagonalizable. Therefore, the open problem lies in constructing methods that optimize not only for accuracy but also for the stability and the robustness of the underlying neural network, a criterion that is distinct from the other. △ Less

Submitted 30 April, 2018; originally announced April 2018.