pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.08736 · v2 · submitted 2025-10-09 · 🧬 q-bio.NC

Neural correlates of perceptual consciousness from within: a narrative review of human intracranial research

Francois Stockart , Alexis Robin , Hal Blumenfeld , Milan Brazdil , Philippe Kahane , Liad Mudrik , Jasmine Thum , Michael Pereira
show 1 more author
Nathan Faivre
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 08:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.NC
keywords neural correlates of consciousnessintracranial recordingsperceptual consciousnesssingle neuron recordingssensory theories of consciousnesscognitive theories of consciousnesshuman neuroscience
0
0 comments X

The pith

Human intracranial recordings advance the identification of neural correlates of perceptual consciousness.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper reviews how recordings made directly from the human brain can help identify the neural correlates of perceptual consciousness. It highlights that intracranial methods provide high spatial and temporal resolution, greater signal sensitivity, and access to both cortical and subcortical regions compared to non-invasive techniques. The authors examine findings from single-neuron and population-level studies and discuss what these imply for theories that tie consciousness to sensory processing versus higher cognitive functions. Understanding these neural bases matters for resolving fundamental questions about how conscious experience arises in the brain.

Core claim

Human intracranial recordings advance the search for neural correlates of perceptual consciousness by offering high spatiotemporal resolution, improved signal sensitivity, and broad cortical and subcortical coverage. Studies examining NCCs at single neurons and populations of neurons have implications for debates between cognitive and sensory theories of consciousness.

What carries the argument

Intracranial recordings that capture brain activity with high resolution from within the skull, allowing better isolation of consciousness-related signals from other processes.

If this is right

  • Single-neuron recordings can identify activity patterns linked specifically to conscious perception.
  • Population-level data can better separate true NCCs from concurrent cognitive activity.
  • Higher signal sensitivity allows more confident interpretation of null results in NCC experiments.
  • Broad coverage including subcortical structures expands the possible locations of NCCs.
  • These recordings can test predictions distinguishing sensory from cognitive theories of consciousness.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If intracranial methods confirm specific NCCs, they could guide the design of more targeted non-invasive studies in healthy participants.
  • Patient-specific factors in intracranial implant cases may limit how far the findings generalize to typical human brains.
  • New experimental paradigms that combine intracranial data with real-time behavioral measures could test consciousness during natural viewing.

Load-bearing premise

That the reviewed intracranial studies have successfully isolated proper NCCs from concurrent cognitive processes and that the main barrier to progress has been the limited resolution of non-invasive methods.

What would settle it

A demonstration that even high-resolution intracranial data still confounds NCCs with processes such as attention or report would show that resolution alone does not solve the isolation problem.

read the original abstract

Despite many years of research, the quest to identify neural correlates of perceptual consciousness (NCC) remains unresolved. One major obstacle lies in methodological limitations: most studies rely on non-invasive neural measures with limited spatial or temporal resolution making it difficult to disentangle proper NCCs from concurrent cognitive processes. Additionally, the relatively low sensitivity of non-invasive neural measures limits the interpretation of null findings in studies targeting proper NCCs. In this review, we discuss how human intracranial recordings can advance the search for NCCs, by offering high spatiotemporal resolution, improved signal sensitivity, and broad cortical and subcortical coverage. We review studies that have examined NCCs at the level of single neurons and populations of neurons, and evaluate their implications on the debates between cognitive and sensory theories of consciousness. Finally, we highlight the limits of current intracranial human recordings and propose future directions based on emerging technologies and novel experimental paradigms.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. This narrative review argues that human intracranial recordings can advance the identification of neural correlates of perceptual consciousness (NCCs) by providing high spatiotemporal resolution, improved signal sensitivity, and broad cortical/subcortical coverage that non-invasive methods lack. It reviews single-neuron and population-level intracranial studies, evaluates their implications for debates between cognitive and sensory theories of consciousness, and discusses current methodological limits along with proposed future directions using emerging technologies and paradigms.

Significance. If the review comprehensively covers the relevant intracranial literature and accurately assesses how these studies address confounds, it would offer a useful synthesis for consciousness researchers. The emphasis on technical advantages and forward-looking proposals could help guide experimental design in a field where resolution limitations have long been cited as a barrier.

major comments (1)
  1. The central claim that intracranial recordings enable disentangling proper NCCs from concurrent cognitive processes (attention, report, working memory) is load-bearing but rests on an assumption rather than demonstrated controls. The review should explicitly detail, for the cited single-neuron and population studies, the specific contrasts or experimental designs used to isolate perceptual awareness; without this, the asserted advancement over non-invasive methods remains unproven rather than evidenced.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract would benefit from a brief statement of how many studies were reviewed and the main pattern of findings across them to give readers a clearer preview of the synthesis.
  2. Notation for 'proper NCCs' versus broader correlates could be defined more explicitly on first use to avoid ambiguity for readers outside the immediate subfield.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive review of our manuscript. The feedback highlights an important point about strengthening the evidentiary basis for our claims regarding the advantages of intracranial recordings. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that intracranial recordings enable disentangling proper NCCs from concurrent cognitive processes (attention, report, working memory) is load-bearing but rests on an assumption rather than demonstrated controls. The review should explicitly detail, for the cited single-neuron and population studies, the specific contrasts or experimental designs used to isolate perceptual awareness; without this, the asserted advancement over non-invasive methods remains unproven rather than evidenced.

    Authors: We agree that explicitly detailing the experimental contrasts is necessary to substantiate the central claim rather than leaving it as an implicit advantage. While the current manuscript reviews the implications of these studies for sensory versus cognitive theories and notes their use of paradigms that separate perceptual awareness from report and attention (e.g., no-report conditions and graded awareness ratings), we acknowledge that a more systematic presentation of the specific designs would strengthen the argument. In the revised manuscript, we will add a new subsection (or expanded table) that summarizes, for each key cited study, the awareness contrasts, control conditions for cognitive confounds, and how these isolate NCCs. This will make the advancement over non-invasive methods more directly evidenced. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: narrative review summarizes independent studies without derivations or self-referential fits

full rationale

This is a narrative review paper with no equations, parameters, or derivations. The central claim—that intracranial recordings advance NCC research via resolution and coverage—rests on citations to multiple external published studies rather than any reduction to the authors' own inputs or fitted values. No self-definitional loops, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citation chains appear; the review evaluates implications from cited work and notes limits, keeping the argument self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a narrative review the paper rests on the assumption that the selected intracranial studies are representative and that their findings can be meaningfully compared across different paradigms and patient populations.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Intracranial recordings provide meaningfully higher spatiotemporal resolution and signal sensitivity than non-invasive methods for studying NCCs
    Explicitly stated in the abstract as the core methodological advantage.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5707 in / 1145 out tokens · 43987 ms · 2026-05-18T08:55:36.096942+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M., Marshall, W.,

    Albantakis, L., Barbosa, L., Findlay, G., Grasso, M., Haun, A. M., Marshall, W., ... & Tononi, G. (2023). Integrated information theory (IIT) 4.0: formulating the properties of phenomenal existence in physical terms. PLoS computational biology , 19 (10), e1011465. Albertini, D., Del Vecchio, M., Sartori, I., Pigorini, A., Talami, F., Zauli, F. M., ... & A...

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    blinding

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-42519-5 Baroni, F., van Kempen, J., Kawasaki, H., Kovach, C. K., Oya, H., Howard, M. A., ... & Tsuchiya, N. (2017). Intracranial markers of conscious face perception in humans. NeuroImage , 162 , 322-343. Block, N. (2019). What is wrong with the no-report paradigm and how to fix it. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 23 (12)...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42519-5 2017

  3. [3]

    ignition

    Eichenlaub, J. B., Jarosiewicz, B., Saab, J., Franco, B., Kelemen, J., Halgren, E., ... & Cash, S. S. (2020). Replay of learned neural firing sequences during rest in human motor cortex. Cell Reports , 31 (5). Englot, D. J., Yang, L. I., Hamid, H., Danielson, N., Bai, X., Marfeo, A., ... & Blumenfeld, H. (2010). Impaired consciousness in temporal lobe sei...

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    M., Golan, T., Knight, R

    Gerber, E. M., Golan, T., Knight, R. T., & Deouell, L. Y. (2017). Cortical representation of persistent visual stimuli. Neuroimage , 161 , 67-79. Guex, R., Ros, T., Mégevand, P., Spinelli, L., Seeck, M., Vuilleumier, P., & Domínguez-Borràs, J. (2023). Prestimulus amygdala spectral activity is associated with visual face awareness. Cerebral Cortex , 33 (4)...

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    I., Christison-Lagay, K., Kwon, H., Li, J., Wu, K., & Blumenfeld, H

    Khalaf, A., Kronemer, S. I., Christison-Lagay, K., Kwon, H., Li, J., Wu, K., & Blumenfeld, H. (2023). Early neural activity changes associated with stimulus detection during visual conscious perception. Cerebral Cortex , 33 (4), 1347-1360. Kim, C. Y., & Blake, R. (2005). Psychophysical magic: rendering the visible ‘invisible’. Trends in cognitive sciences...

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Kuhn, R. L. (2024). A landscape of consciousness: Toward a taxonomy of explanations and implications. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology , 190 , 28-169. Kwon, H., Kronemer, S. I., Christison-Lagay, K. L., Khalaf, A., Li, J., Ding, J. Z., ... & Blumenfeld, H. (2021). Early cortical signals in visual stimulus detection. Neuroimage , 244 , 118608. ...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06839-2 2024

  7. [7]

    H., & He, B

    Levinson, M., Podvalny, E., Baete, S. H., & He, B. J. (2021). Cortical and subcortical signatures of conscious object recognition. Nature Communications , 12(1),

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    E., Wang, M., Xu, Y., Wu, Z.,

    Li, G., Jiang, S., Paraskevopoulou, S. E., Wang, M., Xu, Y., Wu, Z., ... & Schalk, G. (2018). Optimal referencing for stereo-electroencephalographic (SEEG) recordings. NeuroImage , 183 , 327-335. Li, J., Kronemer, S. I., Herman, W. X., Kwon, H., Ryu, J. H., Micek, C., ... & Blumenfeld, H. (2019). Default mode and visual network activity in an attention ta...

    work page 2018

  9. [9]

    ignitions

    Llinás, R., Ribary, U., Contreras, D., & Pedroarena, C. (1998). The neuronal basis for consciousness. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences , 353 (1377), 1841-1849. Lumer, E. D., Friston, K. J., & Rees, G. (1998). Neural correlates of perceptual rivalry in the human brain. Science , 280 (5371), 1930-1934....

    work page 1998

  10. [10]

    Pereira, M., Perrin, D., & Faivre, N. (2022). A leaky evidence accumulation process for perceptual experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 26 (6), 451-461. Pitts, M. A., Martínez, A., & Hillyard, S. A. (2012). Visual processing of contour patterns under conditions of inattentional blindness. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24 (2), 287-303. Pitts, M....

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    Salti, M., Harel, A., & Marti, S. (2019). Conscious perception: Time for an update?. Journal of cognitive neuroscience , 31 (1), 1-7. Sanchez, G., Hartmann, T., Fuscà, M., Demarchi, G., & Weisz, N. (2020). Decoding across sensory modalities reveals common supramodal signatures of conscious perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 117 ...

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    & Melloni, L

    Seedat, A., Lepauvre, A., Jeschke, J., Gorska-Klimowska, U., Armendariz, M., Bendtz, K., ... & Melloni, L. (2025). Open multi-center intracranial electroencephalography dataset with task probing conscious visual perception. Scientific Data , 12 (1), 1-14. Sergent, C. (2018). The offline stream of conscious representations. Philosophical Transactions of th...

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Sergent, C., & Naccache, L. (2012). Imaging neural signatures of consciousness: ‘What’, ‘When’, ‘Where’ and ‘How’ does it work?. Archives italiennes de biologie , 150 (2/3), 91-106. Seth, A. K., Dienes, Z., Cleeremans, A., Overgaard, M., & Pessoa, L. (2008). Measuring consciousness: relating behavioural and neurophysiological approaches. Trends in cogniti...

    work page 2012

  14. [14]

    Stockart, F., Schreiber, M., Amerio, P., Carmel, D., Cleeremans, A., Deouell, L. Y., ... & Mudrik, L. (2025). Studying unconscious processing: Contention and consensus. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 1-77. Tauste Campo, A., Vázquez, Y., Álvarez, M., Zainos, … & Romo, R. (2019). Feed-forward information and zero-lag synchronization in the sensory thalamoc...

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    M., Knight, R

    Vishne, G., Gerber, E. M., Knight, R. T., & Deouell, L. Y. (2023). Distinct ventral stream and prefrontal cortex representational dynamics during sustained conscious visual perception. Cell Reports , 42 (7). White, A. L., Moreland, J. C., & Rolfs, M. (2022). Oculomotor freezing indicates conscious detection free of decision bias. Journal of Neurophysiolog...

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Wyart, V., Dehaene, S., & Tallon-Baudry, C. (2012). Early dissociation between neural signatures of endogenous spatial attention and perceptual awareness during visual masking. Frontiers in human neuroscience , 6 ,

    work page 2012

  17. [17]

    Yaron, I., Melloni, L., Pitts, M., & Mudrik, L. (2022). The ConTraSt database for analysing and comparing empirical studies of consciousness theories. Nature Human Behaviour , 6 (4), 593-604

    work page 2022