arXiv AI By St John Grimbly, Nicolas Kuske, Evert A. Boonstra, Charel van Hoof, Rowan Hodson, Benjamin Rosman, Ryan Smith, Mark Solms, Jonathan P. Shock

Two Routes to Interoceptive Prioritisation: Dissociating Likelihood Precision and Preference Reweighting in Active Inference

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Oct 13

Two Routes to Interoceptive Prioritisation: Dissociating Likelihood Precision and Preference Reweighting in Active Inference

The paper investigates how an embodied agent can prioritize competing bodily needs using active inference. It compares two strategies: increasing the precision of information about an urgent need and reweighting preferences for outcomes that relieve that need, both individually and combined, within a foraging gridworld with lethal needs. The study finds that precision improves survival and sharpens interoceptive beliefs, while preference reweighting keeps states away from lethal thresholds and alters the agent’s learned body model, with both interventions positively interacting to enhance survival across varied layouts.

arXiv AI
1d ago

Satisficing as competitive Bayesian weighting: a minimal model of goal-directed choice under an unattained target

The paper introduces Risk‑Sensitive Satisficing (RS), a bandit learning rule that evaluates actions based on their past frequency and their surplus or shortfall relative to an aspiration level. RS can be reformulated as Attention Competitive Bayes (ACB), a Bayesian‑like estimator where the aspiration level serves as a prior mean and the limited number of trials limits how strongly evidence can override this prior. ACB predicts that unchosen actions gradually revert toward the aspiration level (pseudo‑forgetting) and that when the aspiration is unattainable, exploration never fully settles, reducing regret in simulations.

By Moto Shinriki, Yu Kono, Tatsuji Takahashi