The Echo Amplifies the Knowledge: Somatic Marker Analogues in Language Models via Emotion Vector Re-Injection
arXiv AIArchived May 12, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.08611v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current language model memory systems store what happened but not how it felt. This distinction -- between semantic memory (knowing about a past event) and episodic memory (re-experiencing it) -- was identified by Tulving as the difference between noetic and autonoetic consciousness. Damasio demonstrated that humans with intact knowledge but absent emotional markers exhibit impaired decision-making. We bridge this gap for language models. Using Gem
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 9 May 2026]
The Echo Amplifies the Knowledge: Somatic Marker Analogues in Language Models via Emotion Vector Re-Injection
Jared Glover
Current language model memory systems store what happened but not how it felt. This distinction -- between semantic memory (knowing about a past event) and episodic memory (re-experiencing it) -- was identified by Tulving as the difference between noetic and autonoetic consciousness. Damasio demonstrated that humans with intact knowledge but absent emotional markers exhibit impaired decision-making.
We bridge this gap for language models. Using Gemma 3 1B-IT with pretrained Gemma Scope 2 sparse autoencoders, we identify 310 emotion-exclusive features at layer 22 with psychologically valid geometry. We construct distinctive-feature emotion vectors during experience and partially re-inject them during recall, triggered by context similarity at layer 7.
We test four conditions paralleling Damasio's framework: A (no memory), B (semantic labels), C (emotion echo), and BC (semantic + echo). For emotional orientation, the echo alone steepens the threat-safety gradient: the regression slope of threat rating on contextual similarity is 0.80 for C vs 0.56 for A (p=0.011, permutation test). For decisions, the echo amplifies knowledge into action: BC=80% good choices vs B=52% (z=+2.60, p<0.01), while the echo alone has no effect (C=22%, n.s.). The echo changes how the model feels independently, but changes what it does only when combined with knowledge -- replicating Damasio's core finding.
The echo amplifies knowledge. It does not replace it.
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.08611 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2605.08611v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.08611
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Jared Glover [view email]
[v1] Sat, 9 May 2026 02:12:39 UTC (596 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-05
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)