Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23129312›Full record

ReviewBrain structure & function2013

Predictions not commands: active inference in the motor system.

Rick A Adams, Stewart Shipp, Karl J Friston

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain structure & function, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 303 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
303citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

303 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 789 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Neural Evidence for Action-Related Somatosensory Predictions.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Active inference and speech motor control.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026
    Review
  20. Article

243 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rick A AdamsThe Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3BG, UK. rick.adams@ucl.ac.uk
Stewart Shipp
Karl J Friston
University College London · GBNational Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 088130Wellcome Trust 091593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The descending projections from motor cortex share many features with top-down or backward connections in visual cortex; for example, corticospinal projections originate in infragranular layers, are highly divergent and (along with descending cortico-cortical projections) target cells expressing NMDA receptors. This is somewhat paradoxical because backward modulatory characteristics would not be expected of driving motor command signals. We resolve this apparent paradox using a functional characterisation of the motor system based on Helmholtz's ideas about perception; namely, that perception is inference on the causes of visual sensations. We explain behaviour in terms of inference on the causes of proprioceptive sensations. This explanation appeals to active inference, in which higher cortical levels send descending proprioceptive predictions, rather than motor commands. This process mirrors perceptual inference in sensory cortex, where descending connections convey predictions, while ascending connections convey prediction errors. The anatomical substrate of this recurrent message passing is a hierarchical system consisting of functionally asymmetric driving (ascending) and modulatory (descending) connections: an arrangement that we show is almost exactly recapitulated in the motor system, in terms of its laminar, topographic and physiological characteristics. This perspective casts classical motor reflexes as minimising prediction errors and may provide a principled explanation for why motor cortex is agranular.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAnimalsBrain MappingCerebral CortexHumansMotor ActivityNerve NetNeural PathwaysNeuronsPredictive Value of TestsReflexVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID23129312
PMCPMC3637647
OpenAlexW2033422410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.