Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29747865›Full record

ArticleNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2018

Deep temporal models and active inference.

Karl J Friston, Richard Rosch, Thomas Parr, Cathy Price, Howard Bowman

Abstract readPublished Erratum
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Continual decision-making dynamics across biological organisms.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Born to act: Deferred action and desire as active inference.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A neural active inference model of perceptual-motor learning.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Karl J FristonWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: k.friston@ucl.ac.uk.
Richard RoschWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: r.rosch@ucl.ac.uk.
Thomas ParrWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: thomas.parr.12@ucl.ac.uk.
Cathy PriceWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: c.j.price@ucl.ac.uk.
Howard BowmanCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Cognitive Systems and the School of Computing, University of Kent at Canterbury, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NF, United Kingdom; School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: H.Bowman@kent.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M023672/1Wellcome Trust 205103/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do we navigate a deeply structured world? Why are you reading this sentence first - and did you actually look at the fifth word? This review offers some answers by appealing to active inference based on deep temporal models. It builds on previous formulations of active inference to simulate behavioural and electrophysiological responses under hierarchical generative models of state transitions. Inverting these models corresponds to sequential inference, such that the state at any hierarchical level entails a sequence of transitions in the level below. The deep temporal aspect of these models means that evidence is accumulated over nested time scales, enabling inferences about narratives (i.e., temporal scenes). We illustrate this behaviour with Bayesian belief updating - and neuronal process theories - to simulate the epistemic foraging seen in reading. These simulations reproduce perisaccadic delay period activity and local field potentials seen empirically. Finally, we exploit the deep structure of these models to simulate responses to local (e.g., font type) and global (e.g., semantic) violations; reproducing mismatch negativity and P300 responses respectively.

Indexed as

Active inferenceBayesianFree energyHierarchicalMMNP300ReadingViolation

Identifiers

PMID29747865
PMCPMC5998386

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.