REVIEW 3 cited by
Building Machines that Learn and Think with People
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
What do we want from machine intelligence? We envision machines that are not just tools for thought, but partners in thought: reasonable, insightful, knowledgeable, reliable, and trustworthy systems that think with us. Current artificial intelligence (AI) systems satisfy some of these criteria, some of the time. In this Perspective, we show how the science of collaborative cognition can be put to work to engineer systems that really can be called ``thought partners,'' systems built to meet our expectations and complement our limitations. We lay out several modes of collaborative thought in which humans and AI thought partners can engage and propose desiderata for human-compatible thought partnerships. Drawing on motifs from computational cognitive science, we motivate an alternative scaling path for the design of thought partners and ecosystems around their use through a Bayesian lens, whereby the partners we construct actively build and reason over models of the human and world.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Levels of Autonomy for AI Agents
A user-role-based five-level framework for designing, certifying, and evaluating AI agent autonomy as a choice independent of agent capability.
-
What Does Success Look Like? Catalyzing Meeting Intentionality with AI-Assisted Prospective Reflection
A study with 18 employees found that a generative AI Meeting Purpose Assistant can help people clarify meeting goals, anticipate challenges, and change how they prepare, with social and technical barriers to adoption.
-
Interaction as Intelligence: Deep Research With Human-AI Partnership
A human-in-the-loop deep research system with transparent, interruptible interaction is claimed to outperform commercial baselines, but the evidence is weakened by small samples and biased instructions.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.