Mathematical architecture unifies consciousness studies and computational psychiatry, suggesting quantifiable resolutions for foundational challenges.
This manuscript presents a unified mathematical formalization of Affective Tagging Theory (ATT), offering a formal, structurally grounded resolution to foundational challenges in consciousness studies and computational psychiatry. By constructing a rigorous analytical bridge between the informational topology of Integrated Information Theory (IIT) and the selective broadcast architectures of Global Workspace Theory (GWT), the framework mathematically operationalizes and addresses the Explanatory Gap by demonstrating that subjectivity is a direct geometric consequence of integrated physical systems. The formalization of the subjective genesis space (S) shifts the conversation from ambient, unquantifiable feeling to precise trajectories within a dynamic neural state space. By introducing independent positive and negative valential tag densities (τ+ and τ-) operating under non-linear synaptic scaling laws (dσ/dt), ATT provides the exact causal mechanism for how phenomenal valence physically forces the reconfiguration of network anatomy. Furthermore, this architecture resolves deep-seated stalemates in contemporary philosophy of mind by decoupling the sensory delta from the cognitive delta, formalizing the resolution of the Static Pain Paradox, and demonstrating how suffering or relief can be sustained along a historical manifold even when real-time sensory velocity falls to zero. Ultimately, ATT provides a highly predictive, testable roadmap that transitions the hard problem from an intractable philosophical debate into an exact, evaluable engineering discipline, offering a quantifiable metric (SNR_val) that maps directly onto empirical neurophysiological anomalies and advanced artificial metabolic optimization profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Élisée Kadima Nsabua (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: