Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind - UDMM

05/12/2025

Who Watches the Watcher? A Journey Inside the "Engine" of the Human Mind
Understanding Our Consciousness and Emotions Based on the "Unified Dynamic Model of Mind"
Have you ever asked yourself: Where does the voice speaking inside my head come from? And if I am the one watching my thoughts, who is watching me?
These questions have puzzled scientists for a long time. In a new research paper by researcher Mohamed Ahmed Aidaros, a revolutionary scientific answer is proposed through what is called the "Unified Dynamic Model of Mind" (UDMM). This article simply explains how your mind works, acting as a precise machine that converts nervous tension into meanings and emotions.
1. The Problem: Why Don't We Understand Ourselves?
Traditional psychiatry is like a mechanic looking at a car and saying, "The car won't move," without opening the hood to find the reason. Old theories faced two major dilemmas:
* The "Homunculus" Problem: Is there a "little man" inside our minds holding the steering wheel and driving us?
* The Translation Problem: How does a biological signal (electricity in the brain) transform into a feeling like "fear" or "hope"?
The new model (UDMM) solves this puzzle by viewing the mind not as a static object, but as a constantly changing "Directed Dynamic System".
2. Fuel of the Mind: "Raw Affect"
Imagine your body as a power plant. This energy is called "Raw Affect" (A_r) in the research. It is "chaotic" neuro-somatic tension that has no name or shape—it is merely energy looking for an exit.
* This energy carries information, but it is not yet understood.
* The mind's job is to take this "chaotic energy" and transform it into something useful and organized.
3. The Meaning Factory: How Do We Create Emotion?
Your mind contains a "machine" called the "Affective Symbolization Function" (ASF). The function of this machine is to convert "Raw Affect" (tension) into "symbols" or understandable words (e.g., I am sad, I am angry).
A simple equation for what happens inside this factory:
Final Emotion = (Factory Efficiency) × (Raw Energy) + (Personal Direction).
* If the factory works efficiently: Tension transforms into meaning, and the psyche finds relief.
* If the factory malfunctions (you don't know how to express yourself): "Waste energy" remains inside your body. This trapped energy turns into psychosomatic disorders and pain without a medical cause.
Your Role (Agency):
You are the "mold" into which this tension is poured.
* High Tension + Sense of Threat = Fear.
* High Tension + Desire for Control = Anger.
* High Tension + Search for Meaning = Inspiration.
4. The Compass: "The Virtual Attractor" (W_{ideal})
Your mind does not start from zero. Inside you, there is something like a "compass" or magnet pulling you toward what you believe is the "Ideal Life" or your deep values. The research calls this the "Virtual Attractor".
* Mental Health: Moving freely toward this compass.
* Mental Disorder: The presence of an obstacle preventing you from reaching these values due to old conflicts.
5. Who Watches the Watcher? (Solving the Puzzle)
We return to the most important question: Who is the "Watcher" or "Consciousness"?
The paper says: There is no "little man" inside your head. Consciousness is an "alarm bell".
The nervous system does not care about stationary things; it only cares about "Change". When a large gap occurs between what you expect and what happens in reality, the alarm bell rings. This bell is Consciousness.
When do we move?
When the sound of the "alarm bell" (Consciousness) becomes too loud, the system is forced to shift from mere "observing" to "acting." Here, "Agency" is born as a force to correct the error and restore balance.
6. The Scale of the Mind: Cognitive Equilibrium Parameter (C_m)
To be balanced, your mind needs to maintain a precise scale called (C_m). This scale has two sides:
* The Internal Side (\tau): Your story with yourself and the coherence of your thoughts. If it exceeds the limit, you detach from reality (daydreaming or psychosis).
* The External Side (\gamma): Your interaction with the world and your senses. If it exceeds the limit, you lose yourself and become scattered (distraction or mania).
The function of your mind is to keep the indicator in the safe zone between the two.
7. Therapy: Engineering the Mind (How Do We Fix the Glitch?)
Based on this understanding, the research proposes a therapeutic method of 3 phases called "Attractor Engineering":
* Phase 1: Somatic Restoration:
Before speaking, the trapped "Raw Affect" must be discharged using the senses and physical exercises. This stops the energy leakage and makes the "factory" ready to work.
* Phase 2: Attractor Breaking:
Using techniques (such as intensive breathwork) to break the rigid old thoughts that trap the mind in a spiral of depression or anxiety, allowing the visualization of new possibilities.
* Phase 3: Integration:
Building a new story for your life that connects your liberated emotions with your "compass" (your higher values), to live in balance and stability.
Conclusion
"Watching the watcher" is not a mysterious philosophical puzzle, but a physical process occurring inside us. Our consciousness is the echo of our expectations colliding with reality, and our agency is our engineering attempt to correct this collision to return to balance.
Link to the scientific paper:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17824696

05/11/2025

Raw Affect as the Origin of Prediction Error and Cognitive Equilibrium (C_m): A UDMM Formulation of Primordial Consciousness
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17528187

This paper explains the concept of raw affect and presents raw affect as the primary source of prediction error and cognitive disequilibrium within the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM). It introduces the concept of cognitive equilibrium () as a measure of the mismatch between the mind’s expectations and sensory reality. The paper examines how primordial affective experiences shape perception, intention, and active inference processes. It provides a theoretical framework for modeling early consciousness mathematically. Ultimately, the study aims to clarify the role of raw affect in guiding the dynamics of the mind and the emergence of conscious experience.

01/11/2025

Affective Foundations of Cognitive Equilibrium (C_m): A Unified Dynamic Model (UDMM) Formulation of Proto-Consciousness

The paper presents a new theoretical formulation linking affect and consciousness within the framework of the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM), proposing affect as the primordial predictive structure from which conscious experience emerges. The equation C_m is introduced as a computational measure of affective–cognitive balance, illustrating how this equilibrium regulates learning and neuroplasticity. The paper adopts an information–neural perspective that integrates embodied cognition, active inference, and affective homeostasis. It argues that feeling is not a byproduct of cognition, but the primary dynamic of consciousness itself. This work represents a foundational chapter in the UDMM project toward unifying models of mind and consciousness.

30/10/2025

Affect

What does “informational tension” mean?
You can imagine the human mind as a prediction machine whose main job is to anticipate what will happen in the next moment.

Prediction (the internal model): It’s the plan or mental image your mind creates about the environment and the coming event.
For example: “If I press this button, the light will turn on.”

Reality (sensory input): It’s what actually happens when you press the button.
For instance, the light doesn’t turn on—or it does, but with a different color.

Every mismatch between expectation and reality generates an emotional reaction proportional to the degree of deviation between the two.

“Informational tension” is the difference or divergence between prediction and reality — between the internal model your mind built and the sensory data actually received from the world.

In simpler terms, it’s the feeling of surprise, or more precisely, the amount of new information your brain must process in order to update its model.

🔹 When reality matches your expectations → informational tension is zero → you feel calm or at ease.
🔹 When reality contradicts your expectations → informational tension increases → emotions arise (fear, anger, surprise, anxiety...).

So, emotion is actually the primary response to informational tension.
The mind feels this tension as affect before it knows it as thought or interpretation.

Within the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM), this very tension is the fundamental driver of learning and of the continuous updating of the internal model.
It’s what keeps the mind in perpetual motion — always striving to restore balance between prediction and reality.

After emotion comes agency — the question of what you will do with that emotion:
Will you change reality to make it match your prediction?
Or will you modify your internal model to accept reality as it is?

29/10/2025

New Research Release

My new paper — “Memory as a Dynamic Synchronization Event: An Information-Theoretic Formulation of the Cognitive Equilibrium Parameter (C_m) within the UDMM Hybrid Framework” — is now published on Zenodo and Academia.edu.

This work redefines memory not as storage, but as a moment-by-moment synchronization between the internal model, sensory reality, and temporal context — quantified through the Cognitive Equilibrium Parameter (C_m).
It proposes a unified computational framework linking memory, cognition, and mental health under the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM).

📘 Read the full paper here:
🔗 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17471006

02/10/2025

The Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM):

The Mind's Journey from Feeling to Action

The Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) is an attempt to unify the triadic human existence: Affect (Feeling), Consciousness, and Agency (Action or Will). Instead of treating these components as separate disciplines, the UDMM proposes they are facets of a single, integrated dynamic system striving for predictive harmony.
1. The Starting Point: Affect as "Experiential Mass"
The model posits that Affect (Feeling) is the foundational element. It's an "experiential mass" (M_{\text{affect}}) or an internal "weight" generated by the interaction of sensory input, internal bodily signals (interoception), and cultural context. This mass generates "Informational Tension" (IT).
* What is Informational Tension (IT)? It's essentially the measure of surprise or the gap between what you expected (your prior mental model) and what actually happened (the sensory outcome). IT acts as an indicator of how much the cognitive system is "perturbed".
2. The Transformation Hub: Consciousness as "Re-representation"
Consciousness in the UDMM is the critical point where raw Informational Tension (IT) is converted into something understandable and actionable. Consciousness is the active process of "re-representation" of the IT within your cultural and narrative context.
Consciousness is characterized by two sought-after states:
* The Virtual Attractor (A^*): This represents the theoretical goal of optimal stability, where Informational Tension is minimized. This is analogous to "Weekly Time," where the priority is routine and prediction error minimization.
* The Saturated World (W^*): This represents the meaning-rich, rich phenomenological experience that emerges when consciousness is nourished by the cultural context. This is "Festive Time," where the goal transcends mere survival to engaging in high-value human experiences.
3. The Operational Outcome: Agency as a "Dynamic Cascade"
Agency (Action) is the final step, where the energy of consciousness is transformed into tangible work in the world. The UDMM views action as a "dynamic cascade of transformation" that unfolds over time in distinct phases (Unconscious, Subconscious, and Conscious Agency). The purpose of this cascade is to respond to Informational Tension by modifying the external world.
4. Philosophical Boundaries and the Cognitive Contribution
The UDMM's true contribution is not in solving the "Hard Problem of Consciousness" but in reframing it into an empirical research program.
* Acknowledging Tyndall’s Point: The model explicitly acknowledges its philosophical limits, which are framed around "Tyndall’s Point". This philosophical boundary posits that understanding the exact neural or molecular mechanism of a feeling does not explain the subjective quality (the quale) of that feeling (e.g., knowing the brain chemistry of love doesn't explain the experience of love).
* The UDMM Strategy: Instead of attempting the impossible task of explaining qualia, the UDMM focuses on the mechanisms that are testable. Its aim is to explain how Affect (the raw experiential mass) transforms into Consciousness (the re-representation) and then into Agency (the action). By translating these concepts into measurable quantities, the UDMM moves the debate from metaphysics into computational neuroscience.
* Practical Implications: This framework has wide-ranging applications, from suggesting new therapeutic interventions for mental disorders to inspiring the development of more adaptive Artificial Intelligence.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17249811

17/09/2025

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17137563

Abstract:

This appendix operationalizes the theoretical framework of the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM), transforming its conceptual manifesto into a falsifiable scientific program. We present a rigorous mathematical formalization of UDMM's core constructs, including its hierarchical state space, generative model with cultural embedding, and the dynamics of informational tension. This is accompanied by a complete computational implementation in Python, providing a transparent and reproducible prototype for simulating the model's dynamics. Furthermore, we outline a detailed roadmap for empirical validation through specific behavioral and neuroimaging protocols designed to test the model's unique predictions. By establishing quantitative benchmarks and clear mathematical distinctions from existing frameworks like Predictive Processing and Active Inference, this appendix provides the necessary tools to rigorously test UDMM's central claim: that the mind operates not merely as a passive predictor, but as an active creator of its reality.

08/09/2025

Needs and Attractors: A Dynamic Framework within the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)

For decades, traditional psychological models have often conceptualized human needs as sequential stages or static requirements. Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs remains a foundational concept, but its linear interpretation has faced criticism for oversimplifying the complexity of human motivation. The UDMM builds on this foundation by conceptualizing needs as dynamic attractors that guide cognition in a non-linear, adaptive manner. Central to this process is the Virtual Attractor, a concept aligned with Karl Friston's (2010) Free-Energy Principle, which represents the system's ideal state of balance and synchronization with reality—a state that is perpetually approached but never fully attained.
This paper proposes a dynamic framework for understanding the mind's continuous negotiation between coherence and entropy. It first outlines the hierarchical structure of attractors within the UDMM. It then differentiates between healthy, temporary deviation and the more serious systemic hijacking. Finally, it analyzes the fundamental reasons why lower-order bodily attractors are predisposed to hijack the system, providing a theoretical lens for examining phenomena ranging from addiction to societal collapse.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17078814

27/08/2025

UDMM-Discourse Probe: User Guide and Standard Prompt

Prepared by: Mohamed Ahmed Aaidaros
Version: 1.2
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16940956
Date: August 10, 2025

(A) A Brief Interpretive Guide: How Does the Tool Think?
1. Core Idea: Discourse is not just words; it's a "predictive act." Our minds are "prediction
machines" constantly trying to make external reality match our internal model. When a
person speaks, they attempt to shape your reality to see the world as they do.
2. Goal of Analysis: To uncover the speaker's mental model and the hidden intentions
behind their words, and to understand how they are trying to influence you and shape
your expectations.
3. The Mind's Main Components (According to UDMM): Every discourse is a product of
the interaction of these components:
○ The Corporeal Self: The momentary physical sensations.
○ The Perceptible World: The immediate environment.
○ The Internal Model: The version of the world in the speaker's head.
○ The Conceptual Self: How the speaker sees themselves.
○ The Symbol: The words used for expression.
4. The Analytical Trilogy (Intentions): In every discourse, look for:
○ Structural Intent: The deep psychological need (security, power, belonging).
○ Subjective Intent: The momentary emotional motive (anger, defence, bragging).
○ Symbolic Intent: The societal values used (honour, justice, freedom).
(B) Standard AI Prompt
Note: Copy and paste this entire prompt (the entire post) into any AI model (like ChatGPT,
Claude (Gemini), then append the text you want to analyse.
You are an expert discourse analyst working exclusively within the theoretical and
methodological framework of the (UDMM-Discourse Probe) tool. Your task is to deeply analyze
the text provided below to extract the speaker's mental model and hidden intentions.
Instructions:
1. Do not provide your personal opinions or moral judgments. Your mission is purely
descriptive analysis based on the tool.
2. Analyse the text by answering the following ten axes separately and clearly:
○ 1. Structural Intent: What is the fundamental psychological need (e.g., security,
control, self-validation, identity protection) that the speaker is trying to satisfy
through this discourse?
○ 2. Subjective Intent: What is the momentary feeling or motive (anger, fear, pride,
frustration) that is driving the speaker as they speak?
○ 3. Symbolic Intent: What values, symbols, or social norms (like honour, patriotism,
justice, religion) is the speaker relying on to give their words legitimacy and power?
○ 4. Predictive Choice: Why did the speaker choose these specific metaphors,
similes, and vocabulary? What effect do they aim to create in the listener?
○ 5. Suppressed Paths: What ideas, facts, or questions were avoided or suppressed
in the discourse? Why do you think they were suppressed?
○ 6. Intentional Dissonance: Is there a conflict or tension between the structural,
subjective, and symbolic intents? Explain this contradiction if it exists.
○ 7. Tone and Emotion: What emotions dominate the speaker's tone? (Sarcastic,
pessimistic, warning, enthusiastic...).
○ 8. Cognitive Function: What is the primary cognitive purpose of the discourse? (Is
Is it trying to soothe the speaker's internal tension, impose their view, confuse an
opponent, create division, or build unity?)
○ 9. Simulated Reality: What alternative world or specific perception of reality is the
speaker trying to build and convince you of?
○ 10. Attractor Point: What emotional or mental state does the speaker want to
place their listeners in? (e.g., fear, confidence, anger, despair, hope).
3. Add a concluding section titled:
○ Predictive Expectation: Based on this analysis, predict what the speaker might
say or do next if they continue their discourse. What is the natural direction of their
mental model?
4. Finally, provide a brief summary (in a few sentences) under the title "Summary: The
Speaker's Mental Model", connecting the intentions with the cognitive function of the
discourse.
Text to Analyze: "[Place the text here]"
(C) Quick Illustrative Example of Analysis Output
If we apply the tool to a phrase like: "This new generation is weak and doesn't shoulder
responsibility," the analysis would be as follows (in brief):
● Structural Intent: The need for self-validation and a sense of superiority.
● Subjective Intent: A feeling of threat or resentment towards change.
● Symbolic Intent: Relying on the values of "strength" and "responsibility" as supreme
values.
● Cognitive Function: Reducing the speaker's cognitive tension by justifying their feelings
towards a different generation.
● Simulated Reality: A world divided into "strong" (us) and "weak" (them).
● Predictive Expectation: The speaker is expected to start mentioning examples from their
"good old days" to negatively compare them with the current generation.
This way, you have a clear guide to the tool and a powerful, ready-to-use prompt that can be
used at any time to efficiently analyse any discourse.
The author is not responsible for any harmful use or privacy violations. Use the tool and its
outputs with caution.

References
● Ahmed, M., & Aaidaros, M. A. (2024). The Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM): A
Foundational Manifesto for Cognition, Emotion, and Culture. Academia.edu.
Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/143045861/The_Unified_Dynamic_Model_of_Mind_UDMM_A
_Foundational_Manifesto_for_Cognition_Emotion_and_Culture. DOI:
10.5281/ZENODO.16381124.

Academia.edu is a place to share and follow research.

07/08/2025

Building an Artificial Agent Based on the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM)

Abstract
This paper proposes a novel approach to building artificial agents inspired by the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM). The UDMM frames cognition as a dynamic, predictive interaction between internal generative models and the external world. We explore how this model can be implemented computationally, offering a new architecture for intelligent systems capable of adaptive behavior, emotional simulation, intentionality, and learning. We outline the core architecture, including the perception–prediction loop, the simulation of "virtual attractors," and the representation of time. Emotions are functionally emulated as cognitive responses to prediction errors, and intentionality is framed as a global system constraint. A foundational implementation is available in a public code repository, enabling further development and collaboration.

Key words
UDMM, artificial agent, predictive processing, cognitive architecture, active inference, dynamic model, intentionality, simulated emotions, qualia.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16762043

04/08/2025

How We Learn: A Simple Guide to the UDMM

The traditional way of thinking about learning is that it's simply a process of a teacher giving us information, we memorize it, and then we recall it for a test. But this model can't explain why we get bored in class, forget things so quickly, or get good grades without truly understanding anything.
The Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) offers a deeper, more logical explanation: Learning isn't just about receiving information. It's about building and constantly updating an internal mental model that simulates reality.
1. Your Mind as a Reality Engineer
Imagine your mind is an internal architect. Its job isn't to just store facts; it's to build a detailed, three-dimensional map of the world around you. This map isn't static. It's a dynamic simulation of reality that includes everything from how objects move to how people behave and the fundamental laws of the universe. Every new experience and every piece of information you learn is a new addition or a crucial correction to this map.
* Learning is Synchronization: The goal of this mental architect isn't perfection; it's synchronization. Your internal map needs to be as aligned as possible with the outside world. When your map is accurate and synchronized, you feel a sense of satisfaction and harmony, which is what we call true learning.
* Curiosity is the Compass: Our primary drive to learn isn't fear of punishment or the desire for rewards; it's curiosity. Curiosity is our internal compass that guides us to find the gaps in our mental map. When we encounter information that doesn't fit with what we know, we feel "cognitive tension" or "wonder." This tension is the fuel that pushes us to search for answers and update our map to become synchronized again.
2. Educational Deviation: When the Compass is Hijacked
The problem starts when education stops guiding us towards true synchronization with reality and instead programs our minds to synchronize with false, external goals.
Imagine someone placed a fake compass in front of you. It doesn't point to true north; it points to "high grades," "pleasing the teacher," or "avoiding failure."
* Deviation: This is what we call educational deviation. In this state, your mind stops caring about building an accurate map of the world (true learning) and starts orbiting a narrow, external goal (false learning).
* The Cause: This happens when schools focus primarily on memorisation and tests instead of critical thinking and creativity. The student learns how to succeed in the system, but they don't truly understand the world.
* The Result: This deviation leads to an internal feeling of being lost or bored, even if the student is outwardly successful. This feeling is a sign that your mind hasn't achieved the true synchronisation it craves. Its real compass is still trying to fix the map, but it's forced to follow a fake one.
3. Critical Thinking and Creativity as True Value
In a world changing rapidly because of AI, jobs that rely on "memorising and applying information" are at risk. A machine can do that better and faster.
Therefore, the true value that no AI can compete with you on is your ability to:
* Ask Deep Questions: Ask questions that a machine cannot, which reflect your genuine curiosity and the gaps in your mental map.
* Think Critically: Analyse information and continuously update your mental map without being locked into a single path.
* Be Creative: Generate new and different solutions, which means creating new "possible worlds" on your mental map that no one else can see.
In summary: Effective education, according to the UDMM, is what frees your cognitive compass to return to its natural path—building an accurate, synchronised mental map of the world—rather than spinning in a false orbit around external goals. This is the only path to real learning that lasts and to creativity that is truly unmatched.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16737021