The relationship between humans and artificial intelligence is no longer science fiction -- it's a growing reality reshaping how we live and work. AI has moved beyond research labs into everyday life, powering customer service chats, personalizing travel, aiding doctors in diagnosis, and supporting educators. What makes this moment particularly compelling is AI's increasing collaborative nature. Rather than replacing humans, AI augments our capabilities -- automating routine tasks, enhancing decisions with data, and enabling creativity in fields like design, music, and writing. The future of work is shifting toward AI agents handling tasks autonomously, with humans as supervisors, strategists, and ethical stewards. This flips the traditional model: instead of humans using AI as a tool, intelligent agents will operate independently within constraints, managing everything from scheduling and customer service to complex workflows. Humans will guide and fine-tune these agents to ensure alignment with goals, values, and context. This shift offers major benefits -- greater efficiency, faster decisions, cost savings, and scalability. But it also brings risks: diminished human oversight, a
The release of GPT-image-2 by OpenAI marks a watershed moment in AI-generated imagery: the boundary between photographic reality and synthetic content has never been more difficult to discern. We introduce the GPT-Image-2 Twitter Dataset, the first published dataset of GPT-image-2 generated images, sourced from publicly available Twitter/X posts in the immediate aftermath of the model's April 21, 2026 release. Leveraging the Twitter API v2 and a multi-stage curation pipeline spanning multilingual text heuristics (English, Japanese, and Chinese), browser-automated Twitter "Made with AI" badge verification, and model name variant matching, we curate 10,217 confirmed GPT-image-2 images from 27,662 collected records over a six-day window. We characterize the dataset across four analyses: CLIP-based zero-shot subject taxonomy, OCR text legibility (82.0% of images contain detectable text), face detection (59.2% of images, 22,583 total faces), and semantic clustering (137 CLIP ViT-L/14 clusters). A key negative result is that C2PA content credentials are systematically stripped by Twitter's CDN on upload, rendering cryptographic provenance verification infeasible for social-media-sourced
Generative AI has rapidly entered education through free consumer tools, outpacing the ability of schools and universities to respond. Now a new wave of more autonomous agentic AI systems--with the capacity to plan and act towards goals--promises both greater educational personalization and greater disruption. This chapter argues that successfully navigating these innovations requires balancing three core tensions: (1) Implementation Feasibility, or the practical capacity to integrate AI sustainably into real classrooms; (2) Adaptation Speed, or the mismatch between fast-evolving AI capabilities and the slower pace of educational change; and (3) Mission Alignment, or the need to ensure AI applications uphold educational values such as equity, privacy, and pedagogical integrity. First, we review early evidence of generative and agentic AI in various sectors and in frontline education to illustrate these tensions in context. Then, we present a three-tension framework to guide decision-makers in evaluating and designing AI initiatives across K-12 and higher education. We provide examples of how the framework can be applied to plan responsible AI deployments, and we identify emerging t
We report a comparison of two state-of-the-art agentic AI systems, Claude Code (Anthropic) and Codex (OpenAI), tasked with autonomously executing a simple end-to-end gravitational wave data analysis pipeline on a shared computing infrastructure without human intervention. The pipeline comprises power spectral density estimation from raw Einstein Telescope simulated noise, geometric template bank generation, matched filter recovery of 100 binary black hole signal injections, automated results generation, and large language model-assisted production of a manuscript formatted in the style of Physical Review D. Both agents received identical written specifications and identical compute resources. The experiment was run twice: a first run with unrealistically loud injections, and a second run with signals rescaled to a physically motivated SNR range. The scientific results converged in both runs. However, the agents exhibited substantially different behaviors and computational costs: Claude Code completed the pipeline in ~3.4 minutes with silent deviations from the specification, while Codex required ~16 minutes across explicit self-correcting restarts, including an unsolicited performa
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly employed for decision-support across multiple domains. We investigate whether these models display a systematic preferential bias in favor of artificial intelligence (AI) itself. Across three complementary experiments, we find consistent evidence of pro-AI bias. First, we show that LLMs disproportionately recommend AI-related options in response to diverse advice-seeking queries, with proprietary models doing so almost deterministically. Second, we demonstrate that models systematically overestimate salaries for AI-related jobs relative to closely matched non-AI jobs, with proprietary models overestimating AI salaries more by 10 percentage points. Finally, probing internal representations of open-weight models reveals that ``Artificial Intelligence'' exhibits the highest similarity to generic prompts for academic fields under positive, negative, and neutral framings alike, indicating valence-invariant representational centrality. These patterns suggest that LLM-generated advice and valuation can systematically skew choices and perceptions in high-stakes decisions.
Very soon, millions of AI agents will proliferate across the economy, autonomously taking billions of actions. Inevitably, things will go wrong. Humans will be defrauded, injured, even killed. Law will somehow have to govern the coming wave. But when an AI causes harm, the first question to answer, before anyone can be held accountable is: Which AI Did It? Identifying AIs is unusually difficult. AIs lack bodies. They can copy, split, merge, swarm, and vanish at will. Even today, a "single" AI agent is often an ensemble of instances based on multiple models. The complexity will only multiply as AI capabilities improve. This Article is the first to comprehensively diagnose the legal problem of identifying AIs. Two kinds of identity are required: "thin" and "thick." Thin identification ties every AI action to some human principal, essential for holding accountable the humans who make and use AI agents. Thick identification distinguishes between AI agents, qua agents -- sorting millions of AI entities into discrete, persistent units with stable, coherent goals, essential where principal-agent problems prevent humans from perfectly controlling AIs. This Article also presents a solution:
There is no 'ordinary' when it comes to AI. The human-AI experience is extraordinarily complex and specific to each person, yet dominant measures such as usability scales and engagement metrics flatten away nuance. We argue for AI phenomenology: a research stance that asks "How did it feel?" beyond the standard questions of "How well did it perform?" when interacting with AI systems. AI phenomenology acts as a paradigm for bidirectional human-AI alignment as it foregrounds users' first-person perceptions and interpretations of AI systems over time. We motivate AI phenomenology as a framework that captures how alignment is experienced, negotiated, and updated between users and AI systems. Tracing a lineage from Husserl through postphenomenology to Actor-Network Theory, and grounding our argument in three studies-two longitudinal studies with "Day", an AI companion, and a multi-method study of agentic AI in software engineering-we contribute a set of replicable methodological toolkits for conducting AI phenomenology research: instruments for capturing lived experience across personal and professional contexts, three design concepts (translucent design, agency-aware value alignment, t
Some professional authors are beginning to use AI tools to help produce their fiction writing. Are readers using AI to generate fiction, too? Drawing on over 500,000 anonymized, English-language ChatGPT-user conversations (arXiv:2405.01470), we find that more than one third of the conversations involve some form of fiction generation -- including original stories, roleplay, fanfiction, and erotica. This AI-generated fiction is notably dominated by power users. We identify common fiction generation patterns and profiles among these users, including what we call "infinite story demanders," who repeatedly request and revise variations of the same or similar narratives over extended periods of time. We show that users especially gravitate toward fanfiction and erotica, and that they are broadly drawn to generic forms, repetition, immediacy, and niche combinations of story elements. Our findings motivate two theoretical provocations. First, we argue that AI technologies may lead to a shift in the conventional relationship between the author and reader, potentially producing what we call a "solipsistic reader-writer," who both generates and consumes fiction within a closed conversational
AI agents are promising tools that can act as flexible behavioral nudges to enhance human cooperation in addressing large-scale societal problems. However, evidence on whether AI agents can effectively boost cooperation remains mixed. We recruited 1,283 participants to play iterated Collective Risk Games in small groups, testing whether AI assistants could nudge participants toward cooperation. By using persuasive framing personalized to each player's Social Value Orientation profile, the AI interventions significantly increased contributions and group success rates. These cooperative effects were short-lived, however, fading after the first few rounds. Strikingly, when the AI treatments were reconfigured to promote selfish behavior through exculpatory framing, the negative effects on contributions and group success were larger and substantially more persistent, particularly for personalized interventions. This asymmetry between prosocial and antisocial persuasion highlights the dual-use risks of AI systems designed to influence group behavior in collective action settings.
The premature development of artificial superintelligence poses major risks to humanity, so researchers have proposed international agreements halting such development until it can be done safely. AI progress depends primarily on compute, algorithms, and data; a durable halt would address all three so that advances in one input do not counteract restrictions on another. Improvements to AI algorithms are driven largely through research activities, so this research may need to be restricted during a halt. Given low international trust, signatories will want to verify compliance. This paper analyzes how such restrictions on AI research could be verified, while remaining agnostic about what specific research would be prohibited. It first explores key considerations that affect the verifiability of research restrictions, such as the computational infrastructure necessary for experiments. It then catalogs 28 candidate verification mechanisms. These mechanisms include whistleblowers, search warrants, reviews of AI training code, standard intelligence gathering tools, and more. Some of these mechanisms are not yet implementation-ready, and some might be undesirable upon further inspection.
As AI becomes more common in students' everyday experiences, a major challenge for K-12 AI education is designing learning experiences that can be meaningfully integrated into existing subject-area instruction. This paper presents the design and implementation of an AI4K12-aligned curriculum that embeds AI learning goals within a rural middle school science classroom using Breadth-First Search (BFS) as an accessible entry point to AI problem-solving. Through unplugged activities and an interactive simulation environment, students learned BFS as a strategy for exploring networks and identifying shortest paths, then applied it to science contexts involving virus spread and contact tracing. To examine engagement and learning, we analyzed pre- and post-assessments, student work artifacts, and a teacher interview. Results suggest that students engaged productively with the curriculum, improved their understanding of BFS and AI problem-solving, and benefited from learning these ideas within ongoing science instruction. Teacher feedback further indicated that the module fit well within the science curriculum while supporting intended science learning outcomes. We conclude with curriculum
Neural network checkpoints have quietly become a large-scale data resource: millions of trained weight vectors now exist, each encoding task-, domain-, and architecture-specific knowledge. This position paper argues that model checkpoints should be treated as a first-class data modality, and that generative modeling in weight space should be standardized as a core machine learning primitive. Recent advances demonstrate that neural weights can be synthesized on demand, often matching fine-tuning performance while reducing adaptation cost by orders of magnitude. We contend that these results reflect an underlying structural fact: high-performing models occupy low-dimensional, highly structured regions of weight space shaped by symmetry, flatness, modularity, and shared subspaces. Building on this view, we organize existing methods into a five-stage pipeline, survey applications where the approach is already practical, and clarify current limits: adapter-scale and conditional generation are advancing rapidly, while unrestricted frontier-scale checkpoint synthesis remains open. Our goal is to shift the community's default mindset from optimizing models per task to sampling models from
AI agents, autonomous digital actors, need agent-native protocols; existing methods include GUI automation and MCP-based skills, with defects of high token consumption, fragmented interaction, inadequate security, due to lacking a unified top-level framework and key components, each independent module flawed. To address these issues, we present ANX, an open, extensible, verifiable agent-native protocol and top-level framework integrating CLI, Skill, MCP, resolving pain points via protocol innovation, architectural optimization and tool supplementation. Its four core innovations: 1) Agent-native design (ANX Config, Markup, CLI) with high information density, flexibility and strong adaptability to reduce tokens and eliminate inconsistencies; 2) Human-agent interaction combining Skill's flexibility for dual rendering as agent-executable instructions and human-readable UI; 3) MCP-supported on-demand lightweight apps without pre-registration; 4) ANX Markup-enabled machine-executable SOPs eliminating ambiguity for reliable long-horizon tasks and multi-agent collaboration. As the first in a series, we focus on ANX's design, present its 3EX decoupled architecture with ANXHub and preliminar
Microgravity induces profound metabolic adaptations in mammalian physiology, yet the molecular mechanisms governing thermogenesis in female white adipose tissue (WAT) remain poorly characterized. This paper presents the first machine learning (ML) analysis of NASA Open Science Data Repository (OSDR) dataset OSD-970, derived from the Rodent Research-1 (RR-1) mission. Using RT-qPCR data from 89 adipogenesis and thermogenesis pathway genes in gonadal WAT of 16 female C57BL/6J mice (8 flight, 8 ground control) following 37 days aboard the International Space Station (ISS), we applied differential expression analysis, multiple ML classifiers with Leave-One-Out Cross-Validation (LOO-CV), and Explainable AI via SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). The most striking finding is a dramatic 12.21-fold upregulation of Ucp1 (Delta-Delta-Ct = -3.61, p = 0.0167) in microgravity-exposed WAT, accompanied by significant activation of the thermogenesis pathway (mean pathway fold-change = 3.24). The best-performing model (Random Forest with top-20 features) achieved AUC = 0.922, Accuracy = 0.812, and F1 = 0.824 via LOO-CV. SHAP analysis consistently ranked Ucp1 among the top predictive features, whil
Although discourse around the risks of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has grown, it often lacks a comprehensive, multidimensional framework, and concrete causal pathways mapping hazard to harm. This paper aims to bridge this gap by examining six commonly discussed AI catastrophic risks: CBRN, cyber offense, sudden loss of control, gradual loss of control, environmental risk, and geopolitical risk. First, we characterize these risks across seven key dimensions, namely intent, competency, entity, polarity, linearity, reach, and order. Next, we conduct risk pathway modeling by mapping step-by-step progressions from the initial hazard to the resulting harms. The dimensional approach supports systematic risk identification and generalizable mitigation strategies, while risk pathway models help identify scenario-specific interventions. Together, these methods offer a more structured and actionable foundation for managing catastrophic AI risks across the value chain.
The accelerated development, deployment and adoption of artificial intelligence systems has been fuelled by the increasing presence of big tech in the AI field. This trend has been accompanied by growing ethical concerns and intensified societal and environmental impacts. This position paper argues that irresponsible AI development is strongly driven by big tech's influence and involvement in the field. First, we examine the growing and disproportionate influence of big tech in AI research and argue that its drive for scaling and general-purpose systems is fundamentally at odds with the responsible, ethical, and sustainable development of AI. Second, we review key current environmental and societal negative impacts of AI and trace their connections to big tech's influence. Third, we discuss the underlying economic forces driving big tech's actions. Finally, as a call to action, we invite AI researchers to counter big tech's influence in irresponsible AI development through strategies that build on the responsibility of implicated actors and collective action.
Large language models (LLMs) have gained significant interest in industry due to their impressive capabilities across a wide range of tasks. However, the widespread adoption of LLMs presents several challenges, such as integration into existing applications and infrastructure, utilization of company proprietary data, models, and APIs, and meeting cost, quality, responsiveness, and other requirements. To address these challenges, there is a notable shift from monolithic models to compound AI systems, with the premise of more powerful, versatile, and reliable applications. However, progress thus far has been piecemeal, with proposals for agentic workflows, programming models, and extended LLM capabilities, without a clear vision of an overall architecture. In this paper, we propose a 'blueprint architecture' for compound AI systems for orchestrating agents and data for enterprise applications. In our proposed architecture the key orchestration concept is 'streams' to coordinate the flow of data and instructions among agents. Existing proprietary models and APIs in the enterprise are mapped to 'agents', defined in an 'agent registry' that serves agent metadata and learned representati
There is growing imprecision about what "AI agents" are, what they can do, and how effectively they can be used by their intended users. We pose two key research questions: (i) How does the tech industry conceive and market "AI agents"? (ii) What challenges do end-users face when attempting to use commercial AI agents for their advertised uses? We first performed a systematic review of marketed use cases for 102 commercial AI agents, finding that they fall into three umbrella categories: orchestration, creation, and insight. We then evaluated whether end-users could realize these marketed capabilities in practice: we conducted a usability assessment where N = 31 participants attempted representative tasks for each of these categories on two popular commercial AI agent tools: Operator and Manus. We found that users were generally impressed with these agents but faced significant usability challenges ranging from agent capabilities that were misaligned with user mental models to agents lacking the meta-cognitive abilities necessary for effective collaboration.
This study demonstrates the extent to which prominent debates about the future of AI are best understood as subjective, philosophical disagreements over the history and future of technological change rather than as objective, material disagreements over the technologies themselves. It focuses on the deep disagreements over whether artificial general intelligence (AGI) will prove transformative for human society; a question that is analytically prior to that of whether this transformative effect will help or harm humanity. The study begins by distinguishing two fundamental camps in this debate. The first of these can be identified as "transformationalists," who argue that continued AI development will inevitably have a profound effect on society. Opposed to them are "skeptics," a more eclectic group united by their disbelief that AI can or will live up to such high expectations. Each camp admits further "strong" and "weak" variants depending on their tolerance for epistemic risk. These stylized contrasts help to identify a set of fundamental questions that shape the camps' respective interpretations of the future of AI. Three questions in particular are focused on: the possibility o
The conversation around artificial intelligence (AI) often focuses on safety, transparency, accountability, alignment, and responsibility. However, AI security (i.e., the safeguarding of data, models, and pipelines from adversarial manipulation) underpins all of these efforts. This manuscript posits that AI security must be prioritized as a foundational layer. We present a hierarchical view of AI challenges, distinguishing security from safety, and argue for a security-first approach to enable trustworthy and resilient AI systems. We discuss core threat models, key attack vectors, and emerging defense mechanisms, concluding that a metric-driven approach to AI security is essential for robust AI safety, transparency, and accountability.