LLM societies in Nomic show non-monotonic collective adaptation peaking at mid-scales, with smaller models rule-inert and larger ones restrictive.
hub
ISSN: 2640-3498
13 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
13
Pith papers citing it
hub tools
citation-role summary
background 4
citation-polarity summary
roles
background 4representative citing papers
IntervenSim is an intervention-aware social network simulation that couples source interventions with crowd interactions in a feedback loop, improving MAPE by 41.6% and DTW by 66.9% over prior static frameworks on real-world events.
Open-ended preference data reveals substantial plurality in what people want from AI and divergent interpretations of shared values such as truthfulness.
Obj-Disco decomposes LLM alignment reward signals into sparse weighted combinations of interpretable natural language objectives via iterative analysis of behavioral changes across checkpoints, capturing over 90% of observed reward behavior.
DoubleAgents shows that a distributed-cognition design with coordination agent, dashboard, and policy module increases user comfort and reliance on AI agents for coordination tasks over time.
The paper introduces 'editorial alignment' as a participatory design practice that treats editorial standards as design artifacts to guide LLM behavior in knowledge dissemination, shown through workshops at one Nordic institution.
Order is distinct from control, where control is defined as a local receiver-gated response law demonstrated across biological circuits and LLM response panels with reported prediction accuracies of 72-84%.
Sensitivity analyses of NYC heat emergency indices show that reasonable variations in input variables and spatial scale lead to substantially different risk scores affecting downstream government decisions.
Proposes applying social choice theory as a modeling language and axiomatic tool for incorporating collective input across the ML development pipeline.
A literature review concludes that pursuing consensus in data annotation creates biased AI by dismissing subjective disagreements and enforcing geographic hegemony, and proposes mapping diversity instead.
Introduces PAU as a governance architecture for municipal AI in public spaces, informed by case studies on subgroup-aware scaling (R2=0.89) and pluralistic preference data that treats neutrality as indeterminacy.
A scoping review of AIES and FAccT literature concludes that AI trustworthiness research prioritizes technical precision over social, ethical, and institutional factors, leaving the sociotechnical nature of AI systems underexplored.
citing papers explorer
-
Scale-Dependent Collective Adaptation in Self-Amending LLM Societies: A Cross-Family Study of Emergent Governance
LLM societies in Nomic show non-monotonic collective adaptation peaking at mid-scales, with smaller models rule-inert and larger ones restrictive.
-
IntervenSim: Intervention-Aware Social Network Simulation for Opinion Dynamics
IntervenSim is an intervention-aware social network simulation that couples source interventions with crowd interactions in a feedback loop, improving MAPE by 41.6% and DTW by 66.9% over prior static frameworks on real-world events.
-
What Do People Actually Want From AI? Mapping Preference Plurality
Open-ended preference data reveals substantial plurality in what people want from AI and divergent interpretations of shared values such as truthfulness.
-
Discovering Implicit Large Language Model Alignment Objectives
Obj-Disco decomposes LLM alignment reward signals into sparse weighted combinations of interpretable natural language objectives via iterative analysis of behavioral changes across checkpoints, capturing over 90% of observed reward behavior.
-
DoubleAgents: Human-Agent Alignment in a Socially Embedded Workflow
DoubleAgents shows that a distributed-cognition design with coordination agent, dashboard, and policy module increases user comfort and reliance on AI agents for coordination tasks over time.
-
Editorial Alignment: A Participatory Approach to Engaging Editorial Expertise in LLM-mediated Knowledge Dissemination
The paper introduces 'editorial alignment' as a participatory design practice that treats editorial standards as design artifacts to guide LLM behavior in knowledge dissemination, shown through workshops at one Nordic institution.
-
Order Is Not Control
Order is distinct from control, where control is defined as a local receiver-gated response law demonstrated across biological circuits and LLM response panels with reported prediction accuracies of 72-84%.
-
Scrutinizing Index-Based Risk Assessments: A Case Study in NYC Decision-making for Heat Emergency Management
Sensitivity analyses of NYC heat emergency indices show that reasonable variations in input variables and spatial scale lead to substantially different risk scores affecting downstream government decisions.
-
AI of the People, by the People, for the People: A Social Choice Approach to Collective Control of Artificial Intelligence
Proposes applying social choice theory as a modeling language and axiomatic tool for incorporating collective input across the ML development pipeline.
-
The Consensus Trap: Dissecting Subjectivity and the "Ground Truth" Illusion in Data Annotation
A literature review concludes that pursuing consensus in data annotation creates biased AI by dismissing subjective disagreements and enforcing geographic hegemony, and proposes mapping diversity instead.
-
Pluralistic-Alignment Urbanism: Operationalizing a Right to AI for Inclusive Public Space
Introduces PAU as a governance architecture for municipal AI in public spaces, informed by case studies on subgroup-aware scaling (R2=0.89) and pluralistic preference data that treats neutrality as indeterminacy.
-
Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articles
A scoping review of AIES and FAccT literature concludes that AI trustworthiness research prioritizes technical precision over social, ethical, and institutional factors, leaving the sociotechnical nature of AI systems underexplored.
- Cognitive Comparability and the Limits of Governance: Evaluating Authority Under Radical Capability Asymmetry