The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2501.10476 · v1 · pith:GRNOV2HJ · submitted 2025-01-16 · cs.AI · cs.LG

Revisiting Rogers' Paradox in the Context of Human-AI Interaction

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:GRNOV2HJrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.AI cs.LG
keywords learningworldlearnhumansinteractionsociallyhumanhuman-ai
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Humans learn about the world, and how to act in the world, in many ways: from individually conducting experiments to observing and reproducing others' behavior. Different learning strategies come with different costs and likelihoods of successfully learning more about the world. The choice that any one individual makes of how to learn can have an impact on the collective understanding of a whole population if people learn from each other. Alan Rogers developed simulations of a population of agents to study these network phenomena where agents could individually or socially learn amidst a dynamic, uncertain world and uncovered a confusing result: the availability of cheap social learning yielded no benefit to population fitness over individual learning. This paradox spawned decades of work trying to understand and uncover factors that foster the relative benefit of social learning that centuries of human behavior suggest exists. What happens in such network models now that humans can socially learn from AI systems that are themselves socially learning from us? We revisit Rogers' Paradox in the context of human-AI interaction to probe a simplified network of humans and AI systems learning together about an uncertain world. We propose and examine the impact of several learning strategies on the quality of the equilibrium of a society's 'collective world model'. We consider strategies that can be undertaken by various stakeholders involved in a single human-AI interaction: human, AI model builder, and society or regulators around the interaction. We then consider possible negative feedback loops that may arise from humans learning socially from AI: that learning from the AI may impact our own ability to learn about the world. We close with open directions into studying networks of human and AI systems that can be explored in enriched versions of our simulation framework.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. An Experimental Method to Study Opinion Diffusion in Human-AI Hybrid Societies

    cs.SI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Hybrid human-AI networks in 5x5 grids reached lower final polarization than human-only networks after eight rounds of opinion revision on polarizing topics.

  2. Cognitive offloading and the speedup illusion in human-AI interaction

    cs.CY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Preregistered behavioral study identifies a speedup illusion where users overestimate time savings from AI assistance on cognitive tasks despite no actual difference in completion times.

  3. The efficiency-gain illusion: People underestimate the rate of AI use and overestimate its benefits on simple tasks

    cs.CY 2026-05 accept novelty 6.0

    Three pre-registered studies with 2691 participants show people underestimate their AI usage rate and overestimate efficiency gains on simple tasks, with prior use entrenching further adoption.

  4. Measuring and mitigating overreliance to build human-compatible AI

    cs.CY 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0

    The paper consolidates risks of overreliance on LLMs, identifies gaps in current measurement approaches, and proposes mitigation strategies to keep AI as a human-compatible thought partner.