Research and commercial collaborationArik Shimansky ·
A theoretical framework asking under what conditions felt evaluation could acquire evolutionary value.
The evolutionary puzzle
Why would evolution select for felt evaluation?
Rapid adaptive behaviour does not, by itself, require subjective experience.
Specialised pathways can produce effective responses to recurrent situations without broad evaluation.
But what happens when information outside those specialised mappings could change which action is preferable, and broader processing cannot finish before action is required?
This paper investigates whether that temporal constraint identifies an evolutionary role for provisional, organism-relative valuation.
What specialised responses can already explain
An organism may need to act before it can fully determine what is happening. Specialised pathways respond quickly by restricting the information they process. Excluded information can sometimes change which action is preferable for the organism. Broader processing can incorporate more of that information, but may take longer than the ecological decision deadline allows.
Where temporal constraints create an unresolved problem
The paper proposes that valence gives a provisional model enough priority to guide action while broader processing continues. Its method examines particular organism–task relations rather than assigning a single measure to an entire species.
The proposed temporal condition
TV < TE < TR: the observed early response begins before the ecological deadline, while a response based on sufficiently complete processing would begin only afterwards.
- TV
- The time at which the observed early response begins.
- TE
- The ecological decision deadline: the limit for an effective response.
- TR
- The time at which a response based on sufficiently complete processing would begin.
The framework predicts valenced model selection when mapped specialised pathways cannot explain that response. The timing alone is not the whole test. The proposed research programme varies ecological deadlines, processing demands and specialised coverage within the same organism–task relation.
The proposed role of valence
The broader question is how a system moves from representing what is happening to determining what matters for action. Here, valence concerns the felt assessment of whether an unresolved situation improves or worsens the organism’s capacity to meet its biological needs.
The paper adopts an affective premise linking valence to elementary felt experience. That premise is part of the framework, not established by the temporal ordering alone. It does not imply that every adaptive system has subjective experience or that artificial systems possess valence.
What the framework predicts
When excluded information could change the preferable action, and the ecological deadline precedes broader resolution of that uncertainty, the framework predicts provisional organism-relative priority through valenced model selection if mapped specialised pathways cannot explain the early response.
What would challenge it
The proposed explanatory role would be weakened if mapped specialised pathways fully explain the responses, or if controlled changes to deadlines, processing demands and specialised coverage fail to produce the predicted relationship. Timing alone cannot establish felt experience: that inference also depends on the affective premise.
The central unresolved objection
An unconscious priority-selection mechanism might satisfy the same temporal requirements.
The proposed evolutionary account therefore does not establish phenomenal experience from timing alone.
Its contribution must be evaluated both as an explanation of adaptive selection pressures and in relation to the affective premise connecting valence with elementary felt experience.
What remains unestablished
This is a theoretical published preprint. Publication on Zenodo does not imply peer review, acceptance or consensus. The proposed relationship has not been empirically established in this public record.
Publication record and original abstract
Preprint deposited on Zenodo. This page refers to the version dated .
Shimansky, A. (2026). Valence Under Temporal Constraint: An Umwelt-Based Method for Predicting Felt Experience [Preprint]. Zenodo. 10.5281/zenodo.23034598.
The citation follows the DOI assigned to this Zenodo record.
Read the original abstract
Affective approaches place felt experience at the foundation of consciousness. This paper addresses two related problems: why would evolution select for felt evaluation and how can its presence in an organism be detected? It proposes that analysing the role time plays in an organism's response to its environment holds the key to both.
One of the mechanisms that arises through natural selection to respond to recurrent urgent ecological situations is neural specialisation. Limited pathways connect the relevant subset of sensory input to situation-specific responses with exceptional speed. This adaptation reaches its limit when information outside the predetermined mapping changes which response has the greatest biological value. This requires broader processing that results in a slower response that may be initiated only after the opportunity for effective action has passed.
This paper claims that the model-selection problem arising from ambiguous sensory input that was identified by Solms is located in this gap. The organism must give one interpretation priority before the available evidence has resolved which model of reality is most likely to be correct. Valence is understood as the felt assessment of whether an unresolved situation is improving or worsening the organism’s capacity to meet its biological needs. It gives a provisional model enough priority to guide action while processing continues. The proposed empirical condition is $(T_V<T_E<T_R)$: an observed early response begins while there is still time for an effective response, while a response based on sufficiently complete processing would begin only afterwards. When mapped specialised pathways cannot explain that response, the framework predicts that it is guided by valenced model selection. This inequality identifies the proposed evolutionary boundary at which elementary felt experience first acquires selective value when specialised solutions are insufficient.
Because these temporal relations arise within an organism’s Umwelt, the temporal factors are linked to a particular organism–task relation rather than the species in general. Valence may first emerge in specific behavioural domains and differ across populations or lineages occupying different niches.
The framework proposes a method for predicting whether a given organism possesses valence and therefore, under the affective premise, elementary felt experience. It begins by identifying a recurrent ecological problem, maps the limits of specialised mappings, and tests the resulting temporal prediction. Purpose-designed experiments can test the proposed relationships by manipulating ecological deadlines, processing demands and specialised coverage within the same organism–task relation. The result is not another general marker of consciousness, but a structured research programme for predicting when and where felt valence may emerge.
Abstract by Arik Shimansky, reproduced from the linked Zenodo record under CC BY 4.0.
Invitation to examine the argument
Where criticism would be useful
- Whether the evolutionary selection pressure is genuinely distinct.
- Whether existing theories already explain the proposed mechanism.
- Whether the empirical conditions discriminate competing explanations.
- Whether comparative biological evidence could challenge the account.
Related questions, distinct systems
The Two Clocks of Corporate Failure explores a structural analogy in organisational decision-making. It is not evidence of shared biological mechanisms or organisational consciousness.
The Small Adaptive Systems Inquiry is a separate engineering inquiry. The temporal-constraint theory of valence is not part of that programme.