Sign in

Elliot Murphy

@elliot-murphy.bsky.social
1.9K followers 193 following 759 posts

• Postdoc, Dept of Neurosurgery, UTHealth • Compositionality in neural and artificial systems Website: elliot-murphy.com

PostsRepliesMedia
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
Toward A Whole-Brain Interface Enabled by High-Resolution Surface Electrophysiology www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...
biorxiv.org
Toward A Whole-Brain Interface Enabled by High-Resolution Surface Electrophysiology
The goal of building a whole-brain interface—capable of generating a real-time digital representation of the state of the entire central nervous system—has long been framed as a hardware challenge of ...
000
Reposted by Elliot Murphy
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
New paper out today! We extend Rational Speech Act models using coupled active inference. arxiv.org/abs/2610.04347 A number of clear implications for theories of pragmatics and the language/thought debate follow 🧵
arxiv.org
Evidence and Intervention: A Coupled Active-Inference Extension of Rational Speech Act Models
Identical utterance choices can arise from different communicative causes, and identical interpretations can leave different traces in what a listener learns. Rational Speech Act (RSA) models treat in...
1121
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
When Al Solves Major Open Problems: What Does It Mean for the Future of Mathematics and Beyond? youtu.be/voDtZqijetw?...
youtu.be
When AI Solves Major Open Problems: What Does It Mean for the Future of Mathematics—and Beyond?
YouTube video by National Museum of Mathematics
000
Reposted by Elliot Murphy
Laura Gwilliams @lauragwilliams.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
delighted to share my review article, out now in Trends in Cognitive Sciences! i have been thinking a lot about dynamics lately. this article outlines three key principles - persistence, parallelism, and time-stamped encoding - that support human speech comprehension 🧠✨🌀
07224
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Dialogue gives an agent evidence about its own model of an interlocutor. Speech is therefore not just outward communication; it is also an action for convincing myself of my own model of my speech partner!
000
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
This sits naturally with critiques of treating language as fundamentally 'for communication' (communication is a richly inferential cognitive system!): speaking acts on a partner, but also samples evidence that updates the speaker's own internal model of that partner.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
The broader claim here is that pragmatics is not only a theory of interpretation. It is also a theory of communicative control and self-updating: speaking changes another agent while simultaneously testing and revising one's model of them.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Standard RSA is recovered as a restricted one-step limit of the coupled model. The new predictions emerge away from that limit - after feedback, repetition, partner change, or temporal pressure.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Our active inference model separates things that may look identical in a single choice: current-state inference, partner-specific learning, prospective policy evaluation, habit, and temporary time pressure. Their differences emerge in persistence and transfer.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Two people can converse fluently, each finding the other's responses unsurprising, while maintaining incompatible beliefs about what they are discussing. Mutual predictability is not the same as shared reference.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
In this sense, speech production is as much an *epistemic* act as a communicative one: an outward intervention on another person and an inward experiment on my own beliefs about that person.
110
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
When I speak, I am not only transmitting information to you. I am also probing my own model of you. Your response becomes evidence for or against the partner-model that helped generate my utterance in the first place.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
A philosophical consequence is that the interlocutor in the model is never accessed directly. What I interact with is my internal generative model of you, continually revised by what you say and do (an idea explored well in Alan Moore's comics!)
110
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
RSA is usually framed as inference from an utterance to what a speaker meant. We ask what happens next: that inference changes your model of the speaker, which changes the policy you choose, which changes the speaker in turn.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
New paper out today! We extend Rational Speech Act models using coupled active inference. arxiv.org/abs/2610.04347 A number of clear implications for theories of pragmatics and the language/thought debate follow 🧵
arxiv.org
Evidence and Intervention: A Coupled Active-Inference Extension of Rational Speech Act Models
Identical utterance choices can arise from different communicative causes, and identical interpretations can leave different traces in what a listener learns. Rational Speech Act (RSA) models treat in...
1121
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 05/10/2026
Top-down semantic predictions align phonetic neuronal dynamics in human superior temporal gyrus www.nature.com/articles/s41...
nature.com
Top-down semantic predictions align phonetic neuronal dynamics in human superior temporal gyrus - Nature Communications
How semantic information influences phonetic processing during speech perception remains unclear. Here, the authors show that semantic predictions reshape phonetic representations in human temporal co...
031
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
Published today in the latest volume of Cognitive Neuroscience! www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
tandfonline.com
Necessity and plurality of neural dynamics under ROSE
I am grateful to the authors of the commentary articles for identifying productive points of pressure for any neurocomputational account of syntax: whether semantic interpretation can proceed witho...
020
Reposted by Elliot Murphy
Mal Shah @compositiomality.bsky.social · 30/09/2026
Accepted to Linguistic Inquiry! I argue on syntactic grounds “some of the apples” is really “some apples of the apples” with NP-ellipsis. This explains which quantifiers and which modifiers (adjectives, prepositional phrases, relative clauses) can’t appear. Preprint: ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/009...
ling.auf.net
44512
Reposted by Elliot Murphy
Neural Dynamics Lab, Institute of Neuroinformatics, ETH Zurich @ndlab.bsky.social · 26/09/2026
Our review on language networks and neuromodulation is finally out! 🎉 We propose the Interacting Language Network (ILN), arguing that neuromodulation for language disorders should target distributed networks rather than isolated regions. doi.org/10.1016/j.ne...
doi.org
Redirecting
053
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
Btw, in this lecture I gave in December I directly compare Matilde’s work with your new book (and I end up sympathizing with your approach in some areas), around 1hr53 - 2hr4mins youtu.be/pqDnfNUlvRo?...
youtu.be
"Platonic Forms in the Study of Language and Mind" by Elliot Murphy
YouTube video by Michael Levin's Academic Content
110
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
I would be extremely interested (as would many others!) in reading your engagement with the ‘new minimalism’ of Matilde and others. Hope you get a chance to do so soon.
120
Reposted by Elliot Murphy
Morten H. Christiansen @mh-christiansen.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
👉 New paper with Cris Rivera in Cognitive Science providing preliminary evidence that although chunking across multiple levels of linguistic representation is important to overcoming the Now-or-Never bottleneck, there is no unitary chunking ability 1/2 onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1...
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Is Chunking Ability Unitary Across Levels of Linguistic Representation?
Much like with statistical learning, there is a tendency in the cognitive and language science literature to treat chunking as a unitary, domain-general ability that operates fairly similarly across ...
3193
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
Neurolinguists have tried to find 'simplest Merge' for a long time in the brain, to no avail - this paper shows that taking certain formal properties that many linguistic theories assume are valid (not just Hopf etc) can exclude inadmissible neural processes. Meld is a strong candidate here.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
In fact I explicitly say that NAP is independent of Hopf algebras, colored operads, etc. If a simpler syntactic formalism gives the same invariants with less machinery, NAP should prefer that as its formal input.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
So I would potentially agree with your points but what interests me about the Hopf approach is that I am using these formalisms as unusually explicit generators of neural admissibility conditions, not committing the NAP to the claim that Hopf algebra is the optimal grammatical ontology.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
NAP, as I say in the paper, is a revised methodology for neurobiology of language, and one can feel free to pursue it by being guided by some other computational model if one feels so inclined.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
There is indeed, I agree, some increased machinery going on here for labeling. A bare magma builds unordered binary objects but does not determine which daughter labels or controls the resulting object, so: introduce a head function and then lift Merge to a set-valued hypermagmatic operation.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
Small point, colored operads are used here for typed filtering (theta-role compatibility, head-complement constraints, labeling/interface constraints) and hypermagmas specifically for the problem of headedness/head functions.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
I think factorizing Merge in the way I do in the paper makes the alignment to neural processes much easier, which is ultimately my goal. As you say, Meld in particular is not wedded to Matilde's framework specifically.
100
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 20/09/2026
Good points David, thank you - the Hopf operations need not be interpreted as physically rewriting the syntactic object. They can be construed as algebraic bookkeeping over a workspace (maps that make subobjects and quotients available while the original object remains mathematically represented).
110
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Tagging who may be interested! @kordinglab.bsky.social @libertysays.bsky.social @liinapy.bsky.social @lauragwilliams.bsky.social @davidadger.bsky.social @quiltydunn.bsky.social @thelablab.bsky.social @rtommccoy.bsky.social
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Tagging who may be interested! @jordimartorell.bsky.social @joelberger.bsky.social @shotamomma.bsky.social @vipiai.bsky.social @sandervanbree.bsky.social @anids.bsky.social @wmatchin.bsky.social @adumbmoron.bsky.social @samnastase.bsky.social @gregoryhickok.bsky.social @melaniemitchell.bsky.social
210
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Tagging who may be interested! @jeanremiking.bsky.social @neuroskeptic.bsky.social @sophieslaats.bsky.social @benhayden.bsky.social @drmichaellevin.bsky.social @shaileejain.bsky.social @behrenstimb.bsky.social @taylorwwebb.bsky.social @wiringthebrain.bsky.social @pessoabrain.bsky.social
150
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Overall, I hope the NAP can help researchers productively narrow down on plausible candidate mechanisms in ways that go beyond predictive success, and towards explanatory adequacy.
020
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Crucially, a single 'neural code for composition' is misleading: NAP points to a possible architecture of admissible transformations: store> select > bind (Meld) > seal > reuse. We should identify an invariant, find its neural realization, show downstream use, and selectively perturb it.
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
I then connect these issues to real-time parsing concerns, with a few examples to show how an abstract competence rule can be extended into spatiotemporal constraints.
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
For example, the paper goes into details about how the factorized model of Merge I entertain requires multiple interacting neural codes, including contributions from content-addressable workspace memory and graph-structured transient dynamics (e.g. stable heteroclinic channels).
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Although the binding law is arguably the most vital step, Meld alone is 'syntax'. A separate phase-address/sealing code can record grouping depth and stabilize completed constituents (e.g. ROSE model). Meld is the underlying binding component of Merge, not its workspace or interface dynamics.
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Meld makes a number of predictions, e.g. population prediction: with terminals/statistics matched, alternative bracketings should separate in effective dimensionality within a constituency-preserving subspace.
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Importantly, the best bracketing decoder can be the wrong mechanism. Ordered role-filler laws decode well partly because they retain daughter order that Merge should discard. More decodable information is not automatically more mechanistic truth (similar to 'surprisal' debacle with LLM-brain work).
150
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Many neural binding schemes already exist, from tensor/HRR methods to VTB. Meld's novelty is its *conjunction* of circuit features: neurally interpretable, same-space, bounded, recursively reusable, non-associative, exchange-symmetric - grouping without daughter order (hence Merge-compliant).
130
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
The main mechanistic proposal is a novel neural binding operation for Merge, which I call 'Meld': two active constituent populations converge through shared synapses, combine via a content-dependent sublinear mixture, then pass through saturation. The composite is bounded, reusable, recursive.
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
NAP separates binding from filtering and head selection: phrase-structure and theta-role filters should interact non-additively, while ambiguous head selection should show competition > resolution, not generic 'difficulty'.
120
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Merge(A,B) = [A,B] is a deceptively simple recipe here. In the Hopf-algebraic workspace I discuss, a step is extract > select > bind > reassemble. Derivations become transitions through structured workspace states, so syntax should look like a trajectory of operations, not one regressor or ‘ramp’.
130
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
For syntax, the target is unusually restrictive: preserve non-associative grouping; factor daughter order out of the composed object; remain recursively closed; keep substructures addressable; enforce type/role compatibility; and support headedness.
150
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
NAP's basic rule is simple: a neural mechanism is admissible only if it preserves the defining invariants of the computation it claims to implement. Neural data should then adjudicate among admissible mechanisms - not merely locate correlates of linguistic variables.
140
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Much contemporary work in language neuroscience asks which LLM features, embeddings or surprisal measures best predict brain activity. NAP starts elsewhere: formal invariants first, neural mechanisms second (see: arxiv.org/abs/2609.03160).
150
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
This paper develops the Neural Admissibility Program (NAP): begin with what linguistic computation must preserve, then ask which neural dynamics could actually implement it. Many other domains of neuroscience have long adopted this logic, yet language has not been embraced in the same way.
150
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
New work out today! The result of a 15 year project to offer genuine linking hypotheses between linguistics and neuroscience: a revised research program, and its first result - a novel neural binding operation ('Meld') capturing core properties of natural language syntax 🧵 arxiv.org/abs/2609.14384
arxiv.org
Formal Properties of Language as Constraints on Neural Dynamics
What must a neural system be capable of to implement language? Current research annotates stimuli with linguistic variables and tests which electrodes, voxels, or language-model layers predict neural ...
26915
Elliot Murphy @elliot-murphy.bsky.social · 12/09/2026
He’s right about the main critique, but IM for MCG is part of the coproduct (the delta symbol) not magma, so I don’t think it’s a devastating criticism, open for accommodation
000