ArticleBiological cybernetics2026
Feasible cognition requires latent state.
Article in Biological cybernetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- De novo motor learning as controller synthesis: a conceptual framework.Biological cybernetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intelligent behavior across motor control, speech production, learning, and social cognition operates under uncertainty: sensory feedback is noisy and delayed, actions are imprecise, and observable outcomes often have ambiguous causes. When multiple latent states generate identical or sufficiently similar observations, regulation, learning, and evaluation based on behavior alone become underdetermined. We argue that inference over latent state is therefore a feasibility condition for cognition under partial observability, rather than merely a modeling convenience. Observable signals-movements, sensory inputs, speech outputs, and social actions-should be understood as noisy evidence about hidden causes, including motor state, articulatory configuration, task context, and intentions. This perspective suggests that separate psychological literatures share a common control-theoretic structure: regulation under noise, delay, ambiguity, and partial observability. It also helps explain why diverse domains exhibit robustness, tolerance of variability, context sensitivity, and structured credit assignment. These properties arise from regulation of inferred, task-relevant state, rather than precise control of observable behavior. The account is not proposed as a replacement for belief-state, internal-model, predictive-coding, or active-inference approaches, but as a cross-domain feasibility argument: latent-state representations support control, learning, and evaluation only when task-relevant hidden distinctions are detectable from observations and stabilizable or actionable. Cognition, from this view, depends on latent state estimates that render behavior, learning, and evaluation well-defined under uncertainty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42554782What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.