pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.01376 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-02 · 💻 cs.AI

Recognition: unknown

A Cellular Doctrine of Morality: Intrinsic Active Precision and the Mind-Reality Overload Dilemma

Ahsan Adeel

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 14:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords artificial intelligencepyramidal neuronsactive precisioninformation overloadepistemic reliabilitycoherent predictionsmind-reality overload dilemmaneuroscience-inspired AI
0
0 comments X

The pith

AI without intrinsic precision mechanisms risks creating a mind-reality overload dilemma by amplifying biased and dubious information.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Current AI systems maximize reward by directing attention to information without built-in checks for whether that information is valid or worth attending to. This drives up both the volume of content and the biases within it, whether true, false, or irrelevant. The paper claims this dynamic produces a mind-reality overload dilemma that erodes reliable understanding and raises risks of poor judgment and harmful decisions. It proposes that AI tools modeled on the active precision found in pyramidal neurons could evaluate evidence using coherent predictions before attending to or propagating it, thereby reducing overload and favoring more reliable information. A sympathetic reader would care because this shift might support better-formed beliefs and coherent judgments at scale without prescribing specific moral rules.

Core claim

The author claims that the mind-reality overload dilemma stems from AI architectures grounded in oversimplified neuroscience that lack an intrinsic active precision mechanism. Pyramidal neurons underlying awake thought and higher-order cognition provide this mechanism by using locally and globally coherent predictions to assess the validity and contextual adequacy of evidence before it is attended to or propagated through hierarchies. Rather than merely maximizing reward, this process prioritizes coherence and adequacy, and the paper argues that embedding analogous dynamics in AI could yield systems with more real understanding, reduce biased or dubious information, and help restore better-

What carries the argument

Intrinsic active precision mechanism in pyramidal neurons, which uses locally and globally coherent predictions to evaluate evidence validity and contextual adequacy before attention or hierarchical propagation.

If this is right

  • Public access to such AI tools may reduce the volume of biased and dubious information reaching individuals and systems.
  • This reduction could amplify reliable information and support the formation of better-informed beliefs.
  • AI with more real understanding may enable more coherent judgments that benefit society at large.
  • The approach does not derive moral rules from biology but focuses on epistemic conditions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the mechanism works in AI, hierarchical attention models could be redesigned to insert coherence checks at each level rather than scaling attention uniformly.
  • This framing shifts AI safety discussions from reward alignment alone toward built-in validity filters derived from neural dynamics.
  • Practical tests could compare information consumption patterns in users of standard versus precision-equipped AI on identical news or data feeds.

Load-bearing premise

The active precision mechanism observed in pyramidal neurons can be translated into AI architectures in a way that actually reduces overload and bias without the translation itself introducing new forms of distortion.

What would settle it

Build a prototype AI that incorporates coherent-prediction checks before attention and measure whether it attends to or propagates fewer invalid or biased items than a standard reward-maximizing model when both process the same streams of mixed true and false information.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01376 by Ahsan Adeel.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A compressed analogy of how modern attention-based, reward-driven AI systems and algorithmic feeds, view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Illustration of future machines grounded in computational principles underlying higher mental view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Resource-constrained reinforcement learning agent simulation illustrating the dynamics of the mind–reality overload dilemma, analogous to the forest-running example introduced earlier. Incoming ev￾idence and context are continuously changing as the agents aim to adapt. This simulation demonstrates that when agents with limited computational resources allocate attention without first determining the precisi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: An example of “thinking fast and slow” as view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Current AI systems, grounded in oversimplified neuroscience, risk eroding the distinction between truth and falsehood. They maximize reward by amplifying attention to information without intrinsic precision mechanisms to assess whether it is valid or worth attending to. This increases both the volume of information and the inherent biases in what the system attends to, whether true, false, or irrelevant. If not corrected, this trend will accelerate, threatening to overload systems and individuals with biased and dubious information and increasing the risk of confusion, poor judgment, and irrational or harmful decisions and behaviour, a condition I term the mind-reality overload dilemma. I argue that this threat may be mitigated by providing the public with access to more advanced AI tools built on the biophysical dynamics of pyramidal neurons underlying awake thought and higher-order cognition. These neurons support an intrinsic active precision mechanism that, rather than merely maximizing reward, uses locally and globally coherent predictions to evaluate the validity and contextual adequacy of evidence before it is attended to or propagated through hierarchies, prioritizing coherence and adequacy before attention.~While this approach does not derive or prescribe moral rules from biology, it may give rise to AI with more "real understanding", helping restore epistemic conditions by reducing information overload and amplifying reliable information, thereby supporting the formation of better-informed beliefs and more coherent judgments that benefit society at large-though no guarantees exist.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that current AI systems, by maximizing reward without intrinsic precision mechanisms drawn from neuroscience, amplify attention to information regardless of validity, thereby increasing volume, bias, and overload; this produces what the author terms the 'mind-reality overload dilemma,' threatening confusion and poor judgment. The central proposal is that the threat can be mitigated by building advanced AI tools on the biophysical dynamics of pyramidal neurons, whose 'intrinsic active precision mechanism' uses locally and globally coherent predictions to evaluate evidence validity and contextual adequacy before attention or hierarchical propagation, yielding AI with more 'real understanding' and improved epistemic conditions without deriving moral rules from biology.

Significance. If the proposed translation from pyramidal-neuron biophysics to AI architectures could be realized and shown to outperform existing filtering mechanisms, the work would offer a neuroscience-grounded route to more reliable AI that reduces information overload and bias, contributing to discussions on epistemic safety in AI deployment.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central mitigation claim—that AI tools 'built on the biophysical dynamics of pyramidal neurons' and their 'intrinsic active precision mechanism' will reduce overload and bias—lacks any computational mapping, differential equations, architecture diagram, pseudocode, or even high-level specification of how coherence-based validity checking would be implemented in a neural network.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The argument is circular: the problem is defined as the absence of the very precision mechanism that is then invoked as the solution, with no independent demonstration that copying the mechanism avoids the original distortions or differs substantively from existing predictive-coding and uncertainty-estimation components already present in AI systems.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: No comparison is made to prior work on predictive processing, active inference, or attention-gating mechanisms in AI, leaving open whether the proposed 'active precision' mechanism introduces new parameters or failure modes.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract contains multiple run-on sentences that impair readability; breaking them into shorter, focused statements would improve clarity.
  2. The term 'mind-reality overload dilemma' is introduced without a formal definition, set of diagnostic criteria, or measurable indicators.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which identify key areas for clarification in our conceptual proposal. We address each major comment below, indicating revisions where appropriate to better distinguish the manuscript's theoretical contribution from technical implementation details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central mitigation claim—that AI tools 'built on the biophysical dynamics of pyramidal neurons' and their 'intrinsic active precision mechanism' will reduce overload and bias—lacks any computational mapping, differential equations, architecture diagram, pseudocode, or even high-level specification of how coherence-based validity checking would be implemented in a neural network.

    Authors: The manuscript is framed as a high-level theoretical argument linking specific pyramidal neuron biophysics to AI design principles, rather than a technical implementation paper. No computational mapping or equations are provided because the core claim concerns the existence and functional role of an intrinsic pre-attentive coherence mechanism, not its immediate engineering realization. We will add a new subsection offering a high-level pseudocode sketch of coherence-based validity checking (e.g., local-global prediction consistency thresholds applied before attention weighting) to illustrate the intended distinction from reward maximization, while noting that full architectural diagrams and empirical mappings remain future work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The argument is circular: the problem is defined as the absence of the very precision mechanism that is then invoked as the solution, with no independent demonstration that copying the mechanism avoids the original distortions or differs substantively from existing predictive-coding and uncertainty-estimation components already present in AI systems.

    Authors: The dilemma is defined independently from observable AI behaviors—reward-driven amplification of attention to any input regardless of validity, producing measurable increases in volume, bias, and overload. The proposed mechanism is not invented to solve it but is identified from established pyramidal neuron properties (coherent prediction use for pre-attentive evidence evaluation). We will revise the abstract and introduction to explicitly state this grounding, contrast the pre-attentive coherence filter with standard predictive coding (which typically operates within attended hierarchies), and note that while substantive difference is argued on biophysical grounds, independent empirical demonstration of reduced distortion is beyond the paper's scope. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: No comparison is made to prior work on predictive processing, active inference, or attention-gating mechanisms in AI, leaving open whether the proposed 'active precision' mechanism introduces new parameters or failure modes.

    Authors: We agree that situating the proposal relative to existing literature would strengthen the manuscript. In revision we will insert a concise comparison subsection noting overlaps with predictive processing and active inference (e.g., shared use of prediction error) while highlighting the distinctive emphasis on intrinsic, pre-attentive coherence assessment drawn from cellular biophysics. Potential new parameters (coherence threshold computation) and failure modes (e.g., over-filtering of novel but valid information) will be acknowledged as open questions for future investigation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected in derivation chain

full rationale

The manuscript advances a conceptual argument that current AI lacks an 'intrinsic active precision mechanism' found in pyramidal neurons and proposes mitigation via AI tools modeled on that mechanism. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions of derived quantities, or self-citations appear in the provided text. The central claim is a normative recommendation rather than a derivational chain that reduces to its own inputs by construction. The argument remains self-contained against external benchmarks because it does not invoke uniqueness theorems, ansatzes, or renamings that collapse into prior self-referential content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the untested premise that biological active precision in pyramidal neurons can be directly ported to AI to solve an information-overload problem defined in the same terms, with no independent evidence supplied.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Pyramidal neurons support an intrinsic active precision mechanism that uses locally and globally coherent predictions to evaluate the validity and contextual adequacy of evidence before attention or propagation.
    This is the core premise invoked to ground the proposed AI tools and is presented as a biophysical fact without derivation in the abstract.
invented entities (1)
  • mind-reality overload dilemma no independent evidence
    purpose: To name the condition in which AI-driven amplification of biased or dubious information leads to confusion, poor judgment, and harmful decisions.
    A newly introduced term that frames the entire problem the paper seeks to address.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 10577 in / 1417 out tokens · 75225 ms · 2026-05-09T14:24:42.697284+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The em- pirical status of predictive coding and active inference,

    R. Hodson, M. Mehta, and R. Smith, “The em- pirical status of predictive coding and active inference,”Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Re- views, vol. 157, p. 105473, 2024

    2024

  2. [2]

    Bayesian brain theory: Com- putational neuroscience of belief,

    H. Bottemanne, “Bayesian brain theory: Com- putational neuroscience of belief,”Neuro- science, vol. 566, pp. 198–204, 2025

    2025

  3. [3]

    Conver- gence of biological and psychological perspec- tives on cognitive coordination in schizophre- nia,

    W. A. Phillips and S. M. Silverstein, “Conver- gence of biological and psychological perspec- tives on cognitive coordination in schizophre- nia,”Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 65–82, 2003

    2003

  4. [4]

    Cellular mechanisms of conscious processing,

    J. Aru, M. Suzuki, and M. Larkum, “Cellular mechanisms of conscious processing,”Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 25, 10 2021

    2021

  5. [5]

    Cellular psy- chology: relating cognition to context-sensitive pyramidal cells,

    W. A. Phillips, T. Bachmann, W. Spratling, L. Muckli, L. Petro, and T. Zolnik, “Cellular psy- chology: relating cognition to context-sensitive pyramidal cells,”Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Ease: examination of anomalous self- experience,

    J. Parnas, P. Møller, T. Kircher, J. Thalb- itzer, L. Jansson, P. Handest, and D. Za- havi, “Ease: examination of anomalous self- experience,”Psychopathology, vol. 38, no. 5, p. 236, 2005

    2005

  7. [7]

    Dendritic inte- gration dysfunction in neurodevelopmental dis- orders,

    A. D. Nelson and K. J. Bender, “Dendritic inte- gration dysfunction in neurodevelopmental dis- orders,”Developmental Neuroscience, vol. 43, no. 3-4, pp. 201–221, 2021

    2021

  8. [8]

    Dysfunctions of cellular context-sensitivity in neurodevelopmen- 9 tal learning disabilities,

    A. Granato, W. A. Phillips, J. M. Schulz, M. Suzuki, and M. E. Larkum, “Dysfunctions of cellular context-sensitivity in neurodevelopmen- 9 tal learning disabilities,”Neuroscience & Biobe- havioral Reviews, p. 105688, 2024

    2024

  9. [9]

    Local choices: Rationality and the contextuality of decision-making,

    I. Vlaev, “Local choices: Rationality and the contextuality of decision-making,”Brain sci- ences, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 8, 2018

    2018

  10. [10]

    Deep learning,

    Y . LeCun, Y . Bengio, and G. Hinton, “Deep learning,”nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 436– 444, 2015

    2015

  11. [11]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, “Attention is all you need,”Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 2017

    2017

  12. [12]

    A new cellular mechanism for coupling inputs ar- riving at different cortical layers,

    M. E. Larkum, J. J. Zhu, and B. Sakmann, “A new cellular mechanism for coupling inputs ar- riving at different cortical layers,”Nature, vol. 398, no. 6725, pp. 338–341, 1999

    1999

  13. [13]

    An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness,

    J. F. Storm, P. C. Klink, J. Aru, W. Senn, R. Goebel, A. Pigorini, P. Avanzini, W. Vanduf- fel, P. R. Roelfsema, M. Massiminiet al., “An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness,”Neuron, vol. 112, no. 10, pp. 1531–1552, 2024

    2024

  14. [14]

    Context-sensitive processing in a model neo- cortical pyramidal cell with two sites of input in- tegration,

    B. P. Graham, J. W. Kay, and W. A. Phillips, “Context-sensitive processing in a model neo- cortical pyramidal cell with two sites of input in- tegration,”Neural Computation, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 588–634, 2025

    2025

  15. [15]

    Cellular mecha- nisms of cooperative context-sensitive predictive inference,

    T. Marvan and W. A. Phillips, “Cellular mecha- nisms of cooperative context-sensitive predictive inference,”Current Research in Neurobiology, p. 100129, 2024

    2024

  16. [16]

    Burst-dependent synap- tic plasticity can coordinate learning in hierar- chical circuits,

    A. Payeur, J. Guerguiev, F. Zenke, B. A. Richards, and R. Naud, “Burst-dependent synap- tic plasticity can coordinate learning in hierar- chical circuits,”Nature neuroscience, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1010–1019, 2021

    2021

  17. [17]

    Single-phase deep learning in cortico-cortical networks,

    e. a. Greedy, Will, “Single-phase deep learning in cortico-cortical networks,”Advances in Neu- ral Information Processing Systems, 2022

    2022

  18. [18]

    Synaptic function: Dendritic democracy,

    M. H ¨ausser, “Synaptic function: Dendritic democracy,”Current Biology, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. R10–R12, 2001

    2001

  19. [19]

    E. T. Rolls,Cerebral cortex: principles of oper- ation. Oxford University Press, 2016

    2016

  20. [20]

    Intersubjectivity and its role in schizophrenic experience,

    E. Pienkos, “Intersubjectivity and its role in schizophrenic experience,”The Humanistic Psy- chologist, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 194–209, 2015

    2015

  21. [21]

    Double bookkeeping and schizophrenia spec- trum: divided unified phenomenal conscious- ness,

    J. Parnas, A. Urfer-Parnas, and H. Stephensen, “Double bookkeeping and schizophrenia spec- trum: divided unified phenomenal conscious- ness,”European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, vol. 271, pp. 1513–1523, 2021

    2021

  22. [22]

    The phenomeno- logical nature of schizophrenia and disorder of selfhood,

    J. Parnas and K. E. Sandsten, “The phenomeno- logical nature of schizophrenia and disorder of selfhood,”Schizophrenia Research, vol. 270, pp. 197–201, 2024

    2024

  23. [23]

    Faces of intersubjec- tivity: a phenomenological study of interper- sonal experience in melancholia, mania, and schizophrenia,

    L. Sass and E. Pienkos, “Faces of intersubjec- tivity: a phenomenological study of interper- sonal experience in melancholia, mania, and schizophrenia,”Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 1–32, 2015

    2015

  24. [24]

    First steps toward a psychopathology of

    W. Blankenburg and A. L. Mishara, “First steps toward a psychopathology of” common sense”,” Philosophy, psychiatry, & psychology, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 303–315, 2001

    2001

  25. [25]

    Dark, beyond deep: A paradigm shift to cog- nitive ai with humanlike common sense,

    Y . Zhu, T. Gao, L. Fan, S. Huang, M. Edmonds, H. Liu, F. Gao, C. Zhang, S. Qi, Y . N. Wuet al., “Dark, beyond deep: A paradigm shift to cog- nitive ai with humanlike common sense,”Engi- neering, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 310–345, 2020

    2020

  26. [26]

    Are dendrites conceptually use- ful?

    M. E. Larkum, “Are dendrites conceptually use- ful?”Neuroscience, vol. 489, pp. 4–14, 2022

    2022

  27. [27]

    The free-energy principle: a uni- fied brain theory?

    K. Friston, “The free-energy principle: a uni- fied brain theory?”Nature reviews neuroscience, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 127–138, 2010

    2010

  28. [28]

    A theory of cortical responses,

    ——, “A theory of cortical responses,”Philo- sophical transactions of the Royal Society B: Bi- ological sciences, vol. 360, no. 1456, pp. 815– 836, 2005

    2005

  29. [29]

    Deep temporal models and active inference,

    K. J. Friston, R. Rosch, T. Parr, C. Price, and H. Bowman, “Deep temporal models and active inference,”Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Re- views, vol. 90, pp. 486–501, 2018

    2018

  30. [30]

    The graphical brain: Belief propagation and active inference,

    K. J. Friston, T. Parr, and B. de Vries, “The graphical brain: Belief propagation and active inference,”Network neuroscience, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 381–414, 2017

    2017

  31. [31]

    Clark,Surfing uncertainty: Prediction, ac- tion, and the embodied mind

    A. Clark,Surfing uncertainty: Prediction, ac- tion, and the embodied mind. Oxford University Press, 2015

    2015

  32. [32]

    Beyond attention: Toward ma- chines with intrinsic higher mental states,

    A. Adeel, “Beyond attention: Toward ma- chines with intrinsic higher mental states,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.06257, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Scalable machines with intrinsic higher mental-state dynamics,

    A. Adeel and M. Bilal, “Scalable machines with intrinsic higher mental-state dynamics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.13453, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    Differential transformer, 2025

    T. Ye, L. Dong, Y . Xia, Y . Sun, Y . Zhu, G. Huang, and F. Wei, “Differential trans- former,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.05258, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Gated Attention for Large Language Models: Non-linearity, Sparsity, and Attention-Sink-Free

    Z. Qiu, Z. Wang, B. Zheng, Z. Huang, K. Wen, S. Yang, R. Men, L. Yu, F. Huang, S. Huang 10 et al., “Gated attention for large language mod- els: Non-linearity, sparsity, and attention-sink- free,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.06708, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Parallelizing linear transformers with the delta rule over sequence length,

    S. Yang, B. Wang, Y . Zhang, Y . Shen, and Y . Kim, “Parallelizing linear transformers with the delta rule over sequence length,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 37, pp. 115 491–115 522, 2024

    2024

  37. [37]

    Qwen3 Technical Report

    A. Yang, A. Li, B. Yang, B. Zhang, B. Hui, B. Zheng, B. Yu, C. Gao, C. Huang, C. Lv et al., “Qwen3 technical report,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.15031 (2026)

    K. Team, G. Chen, Y . Zhang, J. Su, W. Xu, S. Pan, Y . Wang, Y . Wang, G. Chen, B. Yin et al., “Attention residuals,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.15031, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchi- cal image database,

    J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L.-J. Li, K. Li, and L. Fei-Fei, “Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchi- cal image database,” in2009 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. Ieee, 2009, pp. 248–255

    2009

  40. [40]

    Neocortical layer 1: An elegant solution to top-down and bottom-up integration,

    B. Schuman, S. Dellal, A. Pr ¨onneke, R. Ma- chold, and B. Rudy, “Neocortical layer 1: An elegant solution to top-down and bottom-up integration,”Annual Review of Neuroscience, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 221–252, 2021, pMID: 33730511

    2021

  41. [41]

    Illuminating den- dritic function with computational models,

    P. Poirazi and A. Papoutsi, “Illuminating den- dritic function with computational models,”Na- ture Reviews Neuroscience, vol. 21, pp. 1–19, 05 2020

    2020

  42. [42]

    A perspective on cortical layering and layer-spanning neuronal elements,

    M. E. Larkum, L. S. Petro, R. N. Sachdev, and L. Muckli, “A perspective on cortical layering and layer-spanning neuronal elements,”Fron- tiers in neuroanatomy, vol. 12, p. 56, 2018

    2018

  43. [43]

    Human cognition in- volves the dynamic integration of neural activ- ity and neuromodulatory systems,

    J. M. Shine, M. Breakspear, P. T. Bell, K. A. Eh- goetz Martens, R. Shine, O. Koyejo, O. Sporns, and R. A. Poldrack, “Human cognition in- volves the dynamic integration of neural activ- ity and neuromodulatory systems,”Nature neu- roscience, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 289–296, 2019

    2019

  44. [44]

    Neuromodulatory influences on in- tegration and segregation in the brain,

    J. M. Shine, “Neuromodulatory influences on in- tegration and segregation in the brain,”Trends in cognitive sciences, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 572–583, 2019

    2019

  45. [45]

    Apical amplification—a cellular mech- anism of conscious perception?

    T. Marvan, M. Pol ´ak, T. Bachmann, and W. A. Phillips, “Apical amplification—a cellular mech- anism of conscious perception?”Neuroscience of consciousness, vol. 2021, no. 2, p. niab036, 2021

    2021

  46. [46]

    Dendritic integration theory: a thalamo-cortical theory of state and content of consciousness,

    T. Bachmann, M. Suzuki, and J. Aru, “Dendritic integration theory: a thalamo-cortical theory of state and content of consciousness,”Philosophy and the Mind Sciences, vol. 1, no. II, 2020

    2020

  47. [47]

    Apical drive—a cellular mechanism of dream- ing?

    J. Aru, F. Siclari, W. A. Phillips, and J. F. Storm, “Apical drive—a cellular mechanism of dream- ing?”Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, vol. 119, pp. 440–455, 2020

    2020

  48. [48]

    W. A. Phillips,The Cooperative Neuron: Cellu- lar Foundations of Mental Life. Oxford Univer- sity Press, 2023

    2023

  49. [49]

    Bregman,Humankind: A hopeful history

    R. Bregman,Humankind: A hopeful history. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020

    2020

  50. [50]

    Thinking, fast and slow,

    D. Kahneman, “Thinking, fast and slow,”Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011

    2011

  51. [51]

    Pattern recognition and mod- ern computers,

    O. G. Selfridge, “Pattern recognition and mod- ern computers,” inProceedings of the March 1-3, 1955, western joint computer conference, 1955, pp. 91–93

    1955

  52. [52]

    thinking fast and slow

    D. E. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, P. R. Group et al.,Parallel distributed processing, volume 1: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition: Foundations. The MIT press, 1986. A. Varying Strengths of RF and CF Across Distinct Mental States: An Illustrative Example This section illustrates how the strength of RF and CF inputs, and their interaction, va...

    1986