The article by Dehaene et al. proposes a testable taxonomy of conscious, preconscious, and subliminal processing to resolve inconsistencies in neuroimaging studies of consciousness. The authors argue that consciousness is a state of vigilance, where the brain is in an appropriate state to process sensory stimuli. They distinguish between subliminal processing, where information is insufficient to trigger conscious access due to low bottom-up activation, and preconscious processing, where information is temporarily buffered due to lack of top-down attentional amplification. Conscious processing, on the other hand, involves strong activation that invades a parieto-frontal system, enabling top-down amplification and guiding intentional actions. The authors use this taxonomy to interpret conflicting neuroimaging results, suggesting that conscious perception is associated with surges of parieto-frontal activity. They also discuss the limitations of attention as a confound in neuroimaging studies and propose a formal definition of subliminal, preconscious, and conscious processing. The proposed taxonomy is testable using neuroimaging and electrophysiological techniques, and it aims to reconcile several major theories of conscious perception.The article by Dehaene et al. proposes a testable taxonomy of conscious, preconscious, and subliminal processing to resolve inconsistencies in neuroimaging studies of consciousness. The authors argue that consciousness is a state of vigilance, where the brain is in an appropriate state to process sensory stimuli. They distinguish between subliminal processing, where information is insufficient to trigger conscious access due to low bottom-up activation, and preconscious processing, where information is temporarily buffered due to lack of top-down attentional amplification. Conscious processing, on the other hand, involves strong activation that invades a parieto-frontal system, enabling top-down amplification and guiding intentional actions. The authors use this taxonomy to interpret conflicting neuroimaging results, suggesting that conscious perception is associated with surges of parieto-frontal activity. They also discuss the limitations of attention as a confound in neuroimaging studies and propose a formal definition of subliminal, preconscious, and conscious processing. The proposed taxonomy is testable using neuroimaging and electrophysiological techniques, and it aims to reconcile several major theories of conscious perception.