Active Inference & Emotional Dynamics
Information Dynamics: Simulations in a VUCA World
Active Inference Across Cognitive Layers
How and Why Humans Run Simulations in a VUCA World
The diagram above shows a simple but powerful idea:
Your nervous system is constantly running a simulation of the world, comparing what it expects with what actually happens, and updating its internal model.
This continuous loop of sensing → predicting → comparing → updating → acting is what we call active inference. It does not happen in one place. It emerges from the interaction of three layered processes:
Reflex Layer – Fast Somatic Response
Pattern Layer – Emotional & Associative Flow
Integrative Layer – Awareness & Resonance
Emotions are not a “bolt-on” problem for this system. They are how the system decides which signals matter and how strongly to update the world model.
In a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, this loop is under intense pressure. TAI-KPI uses a trauma-informed, EMS-aware lens to help learners understand how that pressure shows up in their bodies and minds—and how AI can either amplify or ease it.
1. Reading the Diagram: Three Layers, One Loop
Reflex Layer – Fast Somatic Response
The Reflex layer is the fastest part of the system:
polyvagal survival modes (fight, flight, freeze, fawn)
startle responses and protective reflexes
basic “snake or stick?” decisions before detailed interpretation
From an active inference perspective, it is:
the first detector of surprise,
heavily shaped by past threat learning,
and closely tied to Expectation–Mismatch Stress (EMS).
When EMS is high, this layer:
fires more often and more intensely,
sends strong “danger” signals upward,
and narrows the system’s sense of what is possible.
Pattern Layer – Emotional & Associative Flow
The Pattern layer is where experience starts to feel like story:
emotional associations (“this feels like last time”)
narrative fragments and habits
short-term memory and pattern recognition
Jungian functions like sensing, feeling, intuiting, thinking
In active inference, the Pattern layer:
weights prediction errors with emotion
decides how “important” each mismatch is
forms subconscious priors about people, places, and institutions
Here emotion acts as precision:
A signal that says: “Update this prediction strongly; ignore that one.”
When EMS is high:
fear and distrust get over-weighted,
neutral situations are tagged as risky,
and the world model slowly shifts toward pessimism and vigilance.
Integrative Layer – Awareness & Resonance
The Integrative layer holds:
awareness and attention
meaning-making and values
self-observation (“what state am I in?”)
perspective-taking and theory of mind
contemplative practice and deliberate re-framing
In active inference, the Integrative layer:
updates the priors that guide lower layers,
widens or narrows the attentional aperture,
and tunes the organism as a whole toward protection or connection.
When EMS is high and chronic, the Integrative layer often:
collapses into tunnel vision,
becomes rigid and moralistic (“this is how it always is”), or
goes offline altogether in moments of overwhelm.
When supported—through safety, rest, and contemplative practice—it can:
notice transient states (“this is a wave, not the ocean”),
reinterpret anxiety as a signal for learning,
and choose responses that gradually rewrite the Pattern and Reflex layers.
Active inference is not just a brain computation. It is a whole-body, whole-life process of staying in touch with reality.
2. Emotions as Precision: Why Feelings Matter for Learning
In this framework, emotions are not the enemy of intelligence. They are the mechanism by which the system decides:
Which prediction errors deserve attention?
Where should we spend our limited energy to update the model?
You can think of emotion as the volume knob on surprise:
joy and curiosity lower the felt threat and broaden exploration,
fear and anger raise the felt threat and narrow the focus,
shame and helplessness can mute the whole system.
This is why:
anxiety can sometimes be a useful signal: “Something here doesn’t match my world model; I might need more information or support.”
and sometimes a distortion: “My system is over-predicting danger because of old experiences or chronic EMS.”
Contemplative practices—breathwork, body scans, gentle movement, mindful art, prayer, time in nature—give the Integrative layer more sensitivity and range:
noticing an emotion without being swallowed by it,
asking “what is this feeling trying to protect?”,
and choosing responses that keep relationships and learning open.
This is the heart of trauma-informed literacy: we treat emotions as informational signals, not moral failures.
3. Expectation–Mismatch Stress (EMS) and Trauma-Informed Active Inference
Modern socio-technical systems expose people to:
unstable institutions and economies
polarized, hostile information environments
AI-mediated feeds tuned for engagement, not wellbeing
visible global inequities and climate instability
All of these create expectation–reality mismatches that are:
frequent,
ambiguous,
and often outside individuals’ control.
We use Expectation–Mismatch Stress (EMS) to name the cumulative load of these mismatches.
In the three-layer diagram:
EMS amplifies Reflex signals (more startle, more vigilance).
EMS biases Pattern weights (threat priors become sticky).
EMS shrinks Integrative aperture (less capacity for reflection, play, and connection).
A trauma-informed approach does not ask “what’s wrong with you?” It asks:
“What has your prediction system been adapting to?”
And then:
“What conditions would allow your system to update more safely?”
AI literacy in TAI-KPI is built on this compassion. We assume learners are already carrying EMS, and we design explanations, exercises, and tools that lower surprise, increase agency, and invite shared reflection rather than overload.
4. From Individual Layers to Holarchy: Resonance and Prosocial Collaboration
The three-layer diagram describes one organism. But humans rarely act alone. We live inside nested systems:
individuals → teams → organizations → cities → ecosystems
This is the holarchy:
each level is a “whole” in itself,
each is also a “part” of larger wholes,
and all are constantly exchanging information and energy.
When many individuals are dominated by EMS:
Reflex layers talk to Reflex layers (threat vs threat),
Pattern layers organize around fear-based stories,
Integrative layers are too overloaded to coordinate wisely.
In that state, organizations default to dominance hierarchies:
power concentrates at the top,
information flows become distorted,
and EMS is reproduced at every level (students, workers, leaders, communities).
In contrast, holarchic, prosocial systems support:
regulated Reflex layers (safety and clear boundaries),
flexible Pattern layers (emotionally intelligent norms),
active Integrative layers (shared reflection, transparent governance).
We can imagine each person’s three-layer system as a small automaton. When enough of these automata:
experience safety,
share honest feedback,
and align around prosocial values,
their interactions create resonant patterns—a kind of collective Integrative layer. This is what we refer to as the Avalanche of Kindness:
when many agents stabilize in regulated, prosocial states, the whole system tips from fragmentation to collaborative resilience.
5. Human Simulations vs. AI Simulations
Both humans and AI systems can be described as prediction engines, but their simulations are fundamentally different.
AI Simulations
Modern AI systems:
process inputs (tokens, images, embeddings),
predict the most likely next state (next token, next latent vector),
adjust weights based on error (during training).
They do not have:
bodies or interoception,
polyvagal states,
felt emotions,
EMS or trauma history,
attachment, shame, or longing.
AI runs simulations in a purely computational space.
Human Simulations
Humans run simulations in a lived, embodied space:
body states shape what we perceive (Reflex),
emotions weight what we expect (Pattern),
meaning and values decide how we update (Integrative).
Our simulations include:
relationships,
power dynamics,
spiritual and existential questions,
and a lifetime of memories and social learning.
AI as a Mirror for Theory of Mind
Even though AI does not feel, it can:
model beliefs, desires, and intentions as patterns in language and behavior,
reflect back simplified versions of our own assumptions,
highlight inconsistencies or blind spots in our narratives.
Used carefully, AI can become a mirror for theory of mind:
helping us see how we imagine other minds (human or artificial),
exposing the scripts we project onto leaders, strangers, or “the system,”
and giving us practice in asking, “What else might this agent be thinking or needing?”
In TAI-KPI, this is not about trusting AI as an authority. It is about using AI:
as a sandbox for practicing metacognition,
as a tool for exploring multiple perspectives,
and as a partner in debugging our own narratives.
6. Metacognitive Skills: Noticing Transience & Learning From Anxiety
The goal of this page is not just understanding a diagram. It is to cultivate metacognitive skills that support wellbeing and prosocial collaboration.
Key skills we want learners to practice:
State recognition
“Which layer is driving me right now?”
“Am I mostly in Reflex, Pattern, or Integrative?”
Affect labelling and curiosity
“What emotion is here?”
“What prediction or expectation is this emotion protecting?”
Transience awareness
“This state is real and it will change.”
“I can watch this wave move through my system.”
Anxiety as a learning signal
“Is my anxiety pointing to real risk, or to an EMS-shaped expectation?”
“What information, support, or boundary would help my system update safely?”
Holarchic perspective
“How might my internal loop be echoing a larger pattern in my group, organization, or culture?”
“What small kindness or structural shift could lower EMS for others?”
AI-aware reflection
“How might an AI system trained on my data predict my next move?”
“What does that say about my patterns—and do I want to keep them?”
Metacognition is not about controlling every thought. It is about recognizing that you are part of an active inference loop—and learning to participate in that loop with more kindness and choice.
7. Where This Fits in the Larger TAI-KPI Framework
This page does three things in the context of TAI-KPI:
It gives a simple, visual model of how humans run simulations and update world models.
It reframes trauma as EMS, a systemic expectation–mismatch pattern that can be understood and softened rather than denied or moralized.
It lays the foundation for holarchic, prosocial collaboration, where individuals and institutions are redesigned to support regulated, reflective, mutually trustworthy information flows—with AI as a carefully governed partner, not a new overlord.
From here, later sections of the GitBook can:
show how Cellular Automata & Emergence scale these loops up to societies,
explore Kindness Thermodynamics as a way of measuring prosocial efficiency,
and outline practical designs for human–human, human–AI, and AI–AI collaboration that reduce EMS and support planetary wellbeing.
Relational Intelligence Across Agents
1. Human ↔ Human
Empathy as co-regulated state-transition
Trauma-informed communication
Shared attention & theory of mind
2. Human ↔ AI
Understanding model limits
Non-anthropomorphic boundaries
AI as reflective partner, not authority
3. AI ↔ Human
Emotion-safe interaction design
De-escalation and support, not exploitation
Transparent, predictable behavior
4. AI ↔ AI
Multi-agent governance
Error correction and cooperative inference
Embedding prosocial rulesets
All four channels feed into the central principle:
Trustworthy Relational Flow is the foundation of holarchic intelligence systems that scale kindness.
Avalanche Of Kindness: Prosocial Phase Transition
© 2026 Humanity++, Vital Intelligence Model This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution‑ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY‑SA 4.0).
Last updated