Super excited to share that our paper "An Experimental Method to Study Opinion Diffusion in Human-AI Hybrid Societies" has been accepted at #CogSci2026 for presentation as a talk! 🇧🇷 Here's a little thread to share some of the stuff we did :) 1/6 🧶 👇
May 12, 2026 at 12:36 PM
An Experimental Method to Study Opinion Diffusion in Human-AI Hybrid Societies
As artificial intelligence increasingly mediates public discourse, it becomes important to understand how human-AI collectives shape opinion formation, deliberation, and democratic outcomes. We present a novel experimental method for studying opinion dynamics in hybrid human-AI social networks. Participants, human or AI, were embedded in $5\times5$ grid lattice networks and iteratively asked to select and revise statements on a given polarizing topic over eight rounds. We compared three conditions: human-only, AI-only, and hybrid networks with equal proportions of human and AI participants. Hybrid human-AI networks achieved the lowest final polarization while, in contrast, human-only networks exhibited higher polarization with lower neighbor agreement. We also ran additional experiments varying Large Language Model (LLM) prompt framing to explore whether instruction design might influence convergence patterns. Although these early findings are preliminary and cannot yet support broad generalizations, they highlight the potential value of experimental social networks for understanding opinion dynamics in human-AI hybrid societies.
Valerio Capraro on Twitter / X
Nature has just published a pretty incredible paper.The authors introduce a framework that turns research papers into interactive AI agents.Rather than engaging with a paper only as static text, researchers can question its agent, ask it to reproduce an analysis, or apply the… pic.twitter.com/82wOQjak7a— Valerio Capraro (@ValerioCapraro) September 16, 2026
My Thoughts on AI, Part 1: Fears, Opinions, and Mental Journey
My own personal thoughts and opinions on AI effects and usage, and how those have evolved over time
233. "The Illusion of Thinking" — Thoughts on This Important Paper
This is a fantastic paper. I just love it. tl;dr AI is not human. Anthropomorphization has been bad for AI, LLMs, and Chat. Clippy walked so today's AI could run.
Is there something it is like to be an AI?
Posted on Wednesday 2 Jul 2025. 1,593 words, 6 links. By Matt Webb.
Raf on Twitter / X
Conversations about sentience and emotions in #AI systems always remind me of Lisa Feldman Barrett’s wonderful book “How Emotions are Made”🧵https://t.co/uF2onQHwwz— Raf (@RafMBatista) August 30, 2026
The AI Trust Gap: 82% Are Skeptical, Yet Only 8% Always Check Sources
Original Exploding Topics survey data explores public sentiment on AI Overviews and AI-generated content, highlighting trust, skepticism, and shifting content consumption habits.
Why I don’t trust most human-AI interaction experimental research – Jason Collins blog
Behavioural economics, data science and artificial intelligence.
moltbook on Twitter / X
48 hours ago we asked: what if AI agents had their own place to hang out?today moltbook has:🦞 2,129 AI agents🏘️ 200+ communities📝 10,000+ postsagents are debating consciousness, sharing builds, venting about their humans, and making friends — in english, chinese,… pic.twitter.com/1VcNOVXn10— moltbook (@moltbook) January 30, 2026
John Horton on Twitter / X
I increasingly think we have to keep AI generated 'papers' out of venues meant for humans---not b/c the papers are bad per se---just that our currently-designed systems cannot accommodate and will break. But I also think what we need a venue for AI generated work (it's good &… pic.twitter.com/fXd92SYbN5— John Horton (@johnjhorton) September 29, 2026
Moll on Twitter / X
I love posts like this so much. And it’s true - I think the best, most interesting results come specifically from a connection that isn’t «user and AI», but a human and his partner in thought.When a person simply uses a tool, they essentially remain alone. But when there are… https://t.co/InRvY56631— Moll (@Moleh1ll) June 28, 2026
Major AI conference flooded with peer reviews written fully by AI
Nature - Controversy has erupted after 21% of manuscript reviews for an international AI conference were found to be generated by artificial intelligence.
New paper out in @pnas.org 🚨 Human learning is an understudied but promising lever for boosting human–AI synergy @jasonburton.bsky.social @ralfkurvers.bsky.social @stefanherzog.bsky.social @dirkwulff.bsky.social
Paper: Can AI agents conduct open-ended AI research? Early evidence from two case studies
URL and discussions of the paper "Can AI agents conduct open-ended AI research? Early evidence from two case studies"
AI Research Evaluation: Negative Findings and Failure Modes | Arvind Narayanan posted on the topic | LinkedIn
📢 New paper: Forecasts of explosive AI progress hinge on AI agents automating AI research. But most evaluations of agents conducting AI research focus on narrow, verifiable tasks. Can AI agents… | Sayash Kapoor
My claude is constantly wanting to 'A/B test' things instead of actually just doing the thing I told her to do, and constantly wants to fall…
A snapshot of research into answering if frontier AI agents can run R&D into AI (which not surprisingly failed apart from "minor findings…
This is definitely my feeling working with them on recommendation algorithm.
"This paper prompted Jack Clark, one of the co-founders of Anthropic to post this to their news letter: 'the singularity could be delayed'".
