Ontology-constrained multi-LLM scoring of hypothesis support in the predictive processing literature.

Fragmentation is common in interdisciplinary fields with diverse methods and theoretical commitments. Predictive coding neuroscience is a clear example: its literature spans computational theory, electrophysiology, imaging, behavior, and modeling, creating a synthesis problem that conventional meta-analysis cannot easily resolve. Here, we describe a local multi-LLM pipeline for ontology-constrained literature synthesis. The pipeline reads papers, extracts evidence, incorporates figure descriptions, assembles constrained prompts, and validates outputs against an expert glossary. We defined a predictive-coding glossary of thirty-six concepts grouped into three hypotheses: predictive suppression, feedforward error propagation, and ubiquity. A council of ten local language models scored 31 studies across local and global oddball contexts. This enabled pairwise study-agreement analysis, cross-model comparison, and three-dimensional hypothesis-space mapping. Agreement was stronger for local than global oddball contexts, particularly for feedforward error propagation. Hypothesis-space temperature was lower for local oddball contexts and higher for global oddball contexts, indicating greater dispersion in the latter. These results show that local multi-LLM councils can produce auditable disagreement measurements that map heterogeneous literatures into quantitative evidence spaces.