Abstract:The free energy principle (FEP) states that any dynamical system can be interpreted as performing Bayesian inference upon its surrounding environment. In this work, we examine in depth the assumptions required to derive the FEP in the simplest possible set of systems -- weakly-coupled non-equilibrium linear stochastic systems. Specifically, we explore (i) how general the requirements imposed on the statistical structure of a system are and (ii) how informative the FEP is about the behaviour of such systems. We discover that two requirements of the FEP -- the Markov blanket condition (i.e. a statistical boundary precluding direct coupling between internal and external states) and stringent restrictions on its solenoidal flows (i.e. tendencies driving a system out of equilibrium) -- are only valid for a very narrow space of parameters. Suitable systems require an absence of perception-action asymmetries that is highly unusual for living systems interacting with an environment. More importantly, we observe that a mathematically central step in the argument, connecting the behaviour of a system to variational inference, relies on an implicit equivalence between the dynamics of the average states of a system with the average of the dynamics of those states. This equivalence does not hold in general even for linear systems, since it requires an effective decoupling from the system's history of interactions. These observations are critical for evaluating the generality and applicability of the FEP and indicate the existence of significant problems of the theory in its current form. These issues make the FEP, as it stands, not straightforwardly applicable to the simple linear systems studied here and suggest that more development is needed before the theory could be applied to the kind of complex systems that describe living and cognitive processes.

Regarding Flows Under the Free Energy Principle: A Comment on "How Particular is the Physics of the Free Energy Principle?" by Aguilera, Millidge, Tschantz, and Buckley

Some Minimal Notes on Notation and Minima: A Comment on "How Particular is the Physics of the Free Energy Principle?" by Aguilera, Millidge, Tschantz, and Buckley

How particular is the physics of the free energy principle?

Thermodynamics of Markov Processes with Non-extensive Entropy and Free Energy

On the Map-Territory Fallacy Fallacy

Non-equilibrium thermodynamics and the free energy principle in biology

Forced Friends: Why the Free Energy Principle Is Not the New Hamilton's Principle

The free energy principle made simpler but not too simple

One person's modus ponens...: Comment on "The Markov blanket trick: On the scope of the free energy principle and active inference" by Raja and colleagues (2021)

Reply to "Comment on `Extending the laws of thermodynamics for arbitrary autonomous quantum systems'"

Nonequilibrium Force-Flow Relations in Networks

Skewed Thermodynamic Geometry and Optimal Free Energy Estimation

Exergy Flow as a Unifying Physical Quantity in Applying Dissipative Lagrangian Fluid Mechanics to Integrated Energy Systems

Some Observations on Thermodynamic Basis of Pressure Continuum Condition and Consequences of Its Violation in Discretised CFD

Free Energy Methods for the Description of Molecular Processes

A classical mistake and what it tells us. How to do better with an action principle for Hydro and Thermodynamics

Comment on the Reply to Comment on 'Dynamically maintained steady-state pressure gradients'

A note concerning some aspects for application of a thermodynamic extremal principle (TEP) for continua

General Boundedness of Energy Exchange as Alternative to the Third Law of Thermodynamics

Reply to "Comment on `Validity of path thermodynamic description of reactive systems: Microscopic simulations'

Generalized Fluctuation-Dissipation Theorem for Non-equilibrium Spatially Extended Systems