cs.AISep 28, 2026

Nociception as a Control Primitive: Afferent Channels and Nociceptive Memory for Agents Deployed in One Body

Authors: Wolfgang Maass

Organizations: Saarland University and German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI)

Abstract

An agent deployed in a single body cannot learn how fast that body wears, because every trial that would reveal its wear resistance wears the body it would protect. We study this \emph{epoch-one} setting, in which the parameters of a fixed-weight policy are set before the body is drawn and never updated in life. The agent carries a load-gated nociceptive channel and a memory that retains what was felt. We prove that felt cost moves the allocation to the best-\emph{paid} work not yet felt rather than the gentlest, that an agent without retention never sees the felt-cost constraint bind, and that the channel pays only where the threat is individually unpredictable, cheap to avoid and expensive to ignore. We measure per body, setting the agent with channel and memory against the same individual without them, where neither carries a schedule learned across lives. On 2,0002{,}000 simulated floor-layer knees, with wear anchored to published loss rates, feeling, retaining and substituting extends the working life from age 55.255.2 to 59.659.6 and raises career output from 33.733.7 to 36.136.1. 69.3%69.3\% of bodies gain and \textbf{none lose}. A body that feels but retains nothing past the day gains one of the +4.4+4.4 years, and retention carries the rest. A population-trained agent gains +0.65+0.65 years from the same channel at −0.54-0.54 output. The difference is what a species prior already supplies, and a single body has none. The two are related by an identity, the ablation mean reporting (1−χ)(1-χ) of the per-body value with χχ the share a blind schedule already captures, so we report both. Where the regime map predicts value, a care robot sextuples its certified service life and a field-anchored fleet writes off 0.150.15 of its machines instead of 0.550.55. Where it predicts none, a rover gains little over blind caution, so the map holds in both directions.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables10 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

CardsList
  1. Interoceptive Attention as Dynamic Homeostatic Prioritization in a Foraging Agent

    Aug 4, 2026St John Grimbly, Nicolas Kuske, Evert A. Boonstra +7Predator-Prey ModelsPreference Learning