pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.10086 · v1 · pith:WLPUBOJ3new · submitted 2026-06-08 · 💻 cs.AI

Exploratory Responsiveness and Adaptive Rigidity under AI-Assisted Optimization

Balaraju Battu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 16:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords exploratory responsivenessadaptive rigidityAI-assisted optimizationrugged epistemic landscapesmetastable trappingexploration-collapse dynamicssubstitution parameterhysteresis
0
0 comments X

The pith

AI predictive assistance can substitute for exploratory engagement, reducing adaptive responsiveness and trapping systems in local efficiency.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a dynamical theory of exploratory adaptation under AI-assisted optimization. It claims that AI's long-run effects on systems depend on interaction with exploratory responsiveness, the capacity to traverse unfamiliar trajectories. In convergent predictive regimes, AI reduces this responsiveness, producing metastable trapping, hysteresis, premature convergence, and exploration-collapse where systems turn locally efficient yet globally rigid. The substitution effect is stronger in systems with weak initial exploratory routines. Contrasting regimes exist where AI instead amplifies search and mobility across landscapes.

Core claim

The central claim is that the long-run adaptive effects of AI systems depend critically on how predictive assistance interacts with exploratory responsiveness itself. Under convergent predictive regimes, AI systems substitute for exploratory engagement, reducing adaptive responsiveness and generating metastable trapping, hysteresis, premature convergence, and exploration-collapse dynamics in which systems become locally efficient but globally rigid. The framework also identifies contrasting exploration-enhancing regimes in which AI systems amplify exploratory search, conceptual traversal, and adaptive mobility. The effective substitution parameter is responsiveness-dependent.

What carries the argument

Adaptive responsiveness as the central state variable in a dynamical model of evolution over rugged epistemic landscapes, which sets the effective substitution parameter determining whether AI assistance replaces or expands exploratory search.

If this is right

  • Under convergent regimes, AI assistance generates metastable trapping, hysteresis, and exploration-collapse in systems with weak exploratory routines.
  • Systems already possessing high adaptive responsiveness may experience expanded mobility and conceptual traversal from the same AI assistance.
  • Long-run adaptive outcomes depend on institutional structure, developmental context, and the specific architecture of human-machine interaction.
  • The substitution effect is responsiveness-dependent rather than uniform across all systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • AI system design could incorporate features that preserve or boost exploratory routines in users rather than fully automating prediction.
  • Organizations adopting AI might track responsiveness metrics to anticipate rigidity risks before they appear in performance data.
  • The same substitution logic could be tested in domains like scientific research workflows or policy-making processes using predictive models.

Load-bearing premise

Cognitive, institutional, and technological systems evolve over rugged epistemic landscapes with multiple locally reinforced configurations, where adaptive responsiveness determines whether AI substitutes for or amplifies exploration.

What would settle it

An experiment or simulation in which AI-assisted optimization applied to low-responsiveness systems fails to produce measurable increases in hysteresis or decreases in adaptation to novel conditions relative to matched non-AI controls.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.10086 by Balaraju Battu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: AI assistance reduces adaptive responsiveness by lowering exploratory engagement and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Responsiveness collapse threshold under convergent AI-assisted optimization ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Low responsiveness increases local trapping on rugged epistemic landscapes. The figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Hysteresis and the architecture of AI-assisted exploration. The left panel ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Decentralized AI adoption underprovides socially valuable exploration under convergent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Path dependence in exploratory mobility on a stochastic rugged epistemic landscape. AI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper develops a theory of exploratory adaptation under AI-assisted optimization. The central argument is that the long-run adaptive effects of AI systems depend critically on how predictive assistance interacts with exploratory responsiveness itself. We formalize this mechanism using a dynamical framework in which cognitive, institutional, and technological systems evolve over rugged epistemic landscapes characterized by multiple locally reinforced configurations. A central state variable in the model is adaptive responsiveness, which measures the capacity of a system to traverse unfamiliar conceptual and institutional trajectories under changing conditions. Under convergent predictive regimes, AI systems substitute for exploratory engagement, reducing adaptive responsiveness and generating metastable trapping, hysteresis, premature convergence, and exploration-collapse dynamics in which systems become locally efficient but globally rigid. The framework also identifies contrasting exploration-enhancing regimes in which AI systems amplify exploratory search, conceptual traversal, and adaptive mobility. The effective substitution parameter is therefore responsiveness-dependent: systems possessing weak exploratory routines are more vulnerable to exploratory substitution, whereas systems already possessing high adaptive responsiveness may use AI assistance to expand exploratory mobility across rugged landscapes. The long-run adaptive effects of AI consequently depend not only on AI capability itself, but also on institutional structure, developmental context, and the architecture of human-machine interaction.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper develops a theory of exploratory adaptation under AI-assisted optimization. It argues that the long-run adaptive effects of AI depend on how predictive assistance interacts with exploratory responsiveness. Using a dynamical framework, systems evolve over rugged epistemic landscapes with adaptive responsiveness as the central state variable. Under convergent predictive regimes, AI substitutes for exploration, reducing responsiveness and causing metastable trapping, hysteresis, premature convergence, and exploration-collapse. In contrast, exploration-enhancing regimes amplify search. The substitution parameter is responsiveness-dependent.

Significance. If the claims are substantiated with formal derivations, this could be significant for AI ethics and design, providing a model for when AI assistance leads to rigidity versus enhanced adaptability. It highlights the importance of institutional and developmental context in AI interactions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The manuscript claims to formalize a dynamical framework with adaptive responsiveness as central state variable and a responsiveness-dependent substitution parameter, yet no state equations, functional forms, stability analysis, or simulations are presented to establish the listed behaviors such as metastable trapping or hysteresis.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The effective substitution parameter is defined as responsiveness-dependent by construction, so the predicted effects of AI on trapping or amplification reduce directly to the value of the central state variable without independent external grounding or benchmarks.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract is dense and could benefit from separating the description of the two regimes more clearly.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. We address each major comment below, clarifying the scope of the contribution while committing to revisions where the manuscript can be strengthened.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The manuscript claims to formalize a dynamical framework with adaptive responsiveness as central state variable and a responsiveness-dependent substitution parameter, yet no state equations, functional forms, stability analysis, or simulations are presented to establish the listed behaviors such as metastable trapping or hysteresis.

    Authors: The current manuscript develops the framework at a conceptual level, outlining the logical structure and qualitative dynamics without explicit mathematical formalization. We agree this limits substantiation of the specific behaviors. In revision we will add a dedicated section presenting the state equations, the functional form of the responsiveness-dependent substitution parameter, and a qualitative analysis of the resulting fixed points and stability properties. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The effective substitution parameter is defined as responsiveness-dependent by construction, so the predicted effects of AI on trapping or amplification reduce directly to the value of the central state variable without independent external grounding or benchmarks.

    Authors: The responsiveness dependence is introduced as a modeling assumption motivated by prior work on adaptive systems and human-AI complementarity; it is not an arbitrary definition but a direct consequence of treating exploratory capacity as the mediating variable. We will expand the discussion section to include additional citations to empirical literature on AI-assisted search and to outline potential empirical benchmarks for future testing, while keeping the core contribution theoretical. revision: partial

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Substitution parameter defined as responsiveness-dependent by construction; central claims reduce to input assumption

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Abstract]
    "The effective substitution parameter is therefore responsiveness-dependent: systems possessing weak exploratory routines are more vulnerable to exploratory substitution, whereas systems already possessing high adaptive responsiveness may use AI assistance to expand exploratory mobility across rugged landscapes."

    The substitution parameter is introduced by definition as a function of the central state variable (adaptive responsiveness). All subsequent claims—that AI under convergent regimes reduces responsiveness and generates metastable trapping, hysteresis, premature convergence, and exploration-collapse—then follow directly from this definitional choice rather than from any independent dynamical equations or external grounding.

full rationale

The paper asserts a dynamical framework with adaptive responsiveness as central state variable and claims specific behaviors (trapping, hysteresis, exploration-collapse) under AI assistance, but the provided text supplies no state equations, functional forms, fixed-point analysis, or simulations. The sole load-bearing step is the explicit definition that the substitution parameter depends on responsiveness level, after which all predicted effects are stated to follow. This matches self-definitional circularity exactly; no equations or external benchmarks are exhibited to derive the claimed dynamics independently. The framework remains a verbal mapping rather than a demonstrated derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so the ledger extracts the minimal elements explicitly invoked: the rugged landscape assumption and the responsiveness-dependent substitution as the load-bearing modeling choice. No independent evidence or external benchmarks are referenced.

free parameters (1)
  • substitution parameter
    Defined as responsiveness-dependent and used to determine whether AI reduces or amplifies exploration; no value or fitting procedure given.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Cognitive, institutional, and technological systems evolve over rugged epistemic landscapes characterized by multiple locally reinforced configurations.
    Invoked to set up the dynamical framework and the possibility of trapping versus mobility.
invented entities (1)
  • adaptive responsiveness no independent evidence
    purpose: Central state variable measuring capacity to traverse unfamiliar trajectories under changing conditions.
    Introduced as the key variable that modulates AI substitution effects; no independent evidence provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5728 in / 1416 out tokens · 27087 ms · 2026-06-27T16:16:48.270211+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Large ai models are cultural and social technologies.Science, 387(6739):1153–1156, 2025

    Henry Farrell, Alison Gopnik, Cosma Shalizi, and James Evans. Large ai models are cultural and social technologies.Science, 387(6739):1153–1156, 2025

    2025

  2. [2]

    Gpt-4.https://openai.com/index/gpt-4-research/, March 2023

    OpenAI. Gpt-4.https://openai.com/index/gpt-4-research/, March 2023. Accessed Jan- uary 2026

    2023

  3. [3]

    Generative ai at work.The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2):889–942, 2025

    Erik Brynjolfsson, Danielle Li, and Lindsey Raymond. Generative ai at work.The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2):889–942, 2025

    2025

  4. [4]

    The economic po- tential of generative ai: The next productivity frontier

    Michael Chui, Eric Hazan, Roger Roberts, Alex Singla, and Kate Smaje. The economic po- tential of generative ai: The next productivity frontier. Report, McKinsey & Company, 2023

    2023

  5. [5]

    The race between man and machine: Implica- tions of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment.American Economic Review, 108(6):1488–1542, 2018

    Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo. The race between man and machine: Implica- tions of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment.American Economic Review, 108(6):1488–1542, 2018

    2018

  6. [6]

    Automation and new tasks: How technology displaces and reinstates labor.Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(2):3–30, 2019

    Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo. Automation and new tasks: How technology displaces and reinstates labor.Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(2):3–30, 2019

    2019

  7. [7]

    Agrawal, Joshua S

    Ajay K. Agrawal, Joshua S. Gans, and Avi Goldfarb. The turing transformation: Artificial intelligence, intelligence augmentation, and skill premiums. Working Paper 31195, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2023

    2023

  8. [8]

    Risko and Sam J

    Evan F. Risko and Sam J. Gilbert. Cognitive offloading.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9):676–688, 2016

    2016

  9. [9]

    Dunn and Evan F

    Timothy L. Dunn and Evan F. Risko. Toward a metacognitive account of cognitive offloading. Cognitive Science, 40(5):1080–1127, 2016

    2016

  10. [10]

    Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, and Stephen M. Fleming. A role for metamemory in cognitive offloading. Cognition, 193:104012, 2019

    2019

  11. [11]

    Meyerhoff

    Sandra Grinschgl, Frank Papenmeier, and Hauke S. Meyerhoff. Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(9):1477–1496, 2021

    2021

  12. [12]

    The Augmentation Trap: AI Productivity and the Cost of Cognitive Offloading

    Michael Caosun and Sinan Aral. The augmentation trap: Ai productivity and the cost of cognitive offloading.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.03501, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    Human-AI Productivity Paradoxes: Modeling the Interplay of Skill, Effort, and AI Assistance

    Ali Aouad, Thodoris Lykouris, and Huiying Zhong. Human-ai productivity paradoxes: Mod- eling the interplay of skill, effort, and ai assistance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.11350, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  14. [14]

    The impact of generative ai on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers

    Hao-Ping Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. The impact of generative ai on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. InProceedings of the 2025 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 1–22, 2025. 31

    2025

  15. [15]

    Maria del Rio-Chanona, Nadzeya Laurentsyeva, and Johannes Wachs

    R. Maria del Rio-Chanona, Nadzeya Laurentsyeva, and Johannes Wachs. Large language models reduce public knowledge sharing on online q&a platforms.PNAS Nexus, 3(9):pgae400, 2024

    2024

  16. [16]

    Wikipedia contributions in the wake of chatgpt

    Liang Lyu, James Siderius, Hannah Li, Daron Acemoglu, Daniel Huttenlocher, and Asuman Ozdaglar. Wikipedia contributions in the wake of chatgpt. InCompanion Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025, pages 1176–1179, 2025

    2025

  17. [17]

    Ai models collapse when trained on recursively generated data.Nature, 631(8022):755– 759, 2024

    Ilia Shumailov, Zakhar Shumaylov, Yiren Zhao, Nicolas Papernot, Ross Anderson, and Yarin Gal. Ai models collapse when trained on recursively generated data.Nature, 631(8022):755– 759, 2024

    2024

  18. [18]

    Ai, human cognition and knowledge collapse

    Daron Acemoglu, Dingwen Kong, and Asuman Ozdaglar. Ai, human cognition and knowledge collapse. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2026

    2026

  19. [19]

    The pivot penalty in research.Nature, 642(8069):999–1006, 2025

    Ryan Hill, Yian Yin, Carolyn Stein, Xizhao Wang, Dashun Wang, and Benjamin F Jones. The pivot penalty in research.Nature, 642(8069):999–1006, 2025

    2025

  20. [20]

    North.Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance

    Douglass C. North.Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, 1990

    1990

  21. [21]

    North.Understanding the Process of Economic Change

    Douglass C. North.Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton University Press, 2005

    2005

  22. [22]

    Cam- bridge University Press, 2005

    Cristina Bicchieri.The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cam- bridge University Press, 2005

    2005

  23. [23]

    Fabrizio Dell’Acqua, Edward McFowland III, Ethan Mollick, Hila Lifshitz, Katherine C Kel- logg, Saran Rajendran, Lisa Krayer, Fran¸ cois Candelon, and Karim R Lakhani. Navigating the jagged technological frontier: Field experimental evidence of the effects of artificial intelligence on knowledge worker productivity and quality.Organization Science, 37(2):...

    2026

  24. [24]

    Brian Arthur

    W. Brian Arthur. Self-reinforcing mechanisms in economics. pages 9–31, 1988

    1988

  25. [25]

    Columbia University Press, 1993

    Pierre Bourdieu.The Field of Cultural Production. Columbia University Press, 1993

    1993

  26. [26]

    Social skill and the theory of fields.Sociological Theory, 19(2):105–125, 2001

    Neil Fligstein. Social skill and the theory of fields.Sociological Theory, 19(2):105–125, 2001

    2001

  27. [27]

    Social-ecological systems as com- plex adaptive systems: Organizing principles for advancing research methods and approaches

    Rika Preiser, Reinette Biggs, Alta De Vos, and Carl Folke. Social-ecological systems as com- plex adaptive systems: Organizing principles for advancing research methods and approaches. Ecology and Society, 23(4):46, 2018

    2018

  28. [28]

    Eric I. Knudsen. Sensitive periods in the development of the brain and behavior.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(8):1412–1425, 2004

    2004

  29. [29]

    Potential cognitive risks of generative transformer-based ai chat- bots on higher order executive functions.Neuropsychology, 38(4):293–308, 2024

    Umberto Le´ on-Dom´ ınguez. Potential cognitive risks of generative transformer-based ai chat- bots on higher order executive functions.Neuropsychology, 38(4):293–308, 2024. 32

    2024

  30. [30]

    Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of gen- erative artificial intelligence.Science, 381(6654):187–192, 2023

    Shakked Noy and Whitney Zhang. Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of gen- erative artificial intelligence.Science, 381(6654):187–192, 2023

    2023

  31. [31]

    Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning

    Robert A Bjork and Elizabeth L Bjork. Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. InPsychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society, pages 56–64. Worth Publishers, 2011

    2011

  32. [32]

    Productive failure.Cognition and Instruction, 26(3):379–424, 2008

    Manu Kapur. Productive failure.Cognition and Instruction, 26(3):379–424, 2008

    2008

  33. [33]

    Childhood as a solution to explore–exploit tradeoff.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372(1711):20160050, 2017

    Alison Gopnik, Sophie O’Grady, Christopher G Lucas, et al. Childhood as a solution to explore–exploit tradeoff.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372(1711):20160050, 2017

    2017

  34. [34]

    Cortical substrates for exploratory decisions in humans.Nature, 441(7095):876–879, 2006

    Nathaniel D Daw, John P O’Doherty, Peter Dayan, Ben Seymour, and Raymond J Dolan. Cortical substrates for exploratory decisions in humans.Nature, 441(7095):876–879, 2006

    2006

  35. [35]

    Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task

    Nataliya Kosmyna, Eugene Hauptmann, Ye Tong Yuan, Jessica Situ, Xian-Hao Liao, Ashly Vi- vian Beresnitzky, Iris Braunstein, and Pattie Maes. Your brain on chatgpt: Accumula- tion of cognitive debt when using an ai assistant for essay writing task.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08872, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Automation, AI, and the Intergenerational Transmission of Knowledge

    Enrique Ide. Automation, ai, and the intergenerational transmission of knowledge.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.16078, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Artificial intelligence in the knowledge economy.Journal of Political Economy, 133(12):3762–3800, 2025

    Enrique Ide and Eduard Talam` as. Artificial intelligence in the knowledge economy.Journal of Political Economy, 133(12):3762–3800, 2025

    2025

  38. [38]

    Labor as capital: Ai and the ownership of expertise

    Zo¨ e Cullen, Danielle Li, and Shengwu Li. Labor as capital: Ai and the ownership of expertise. Unpublished manuscript, 2025

    2025

  39. [39]

    Information- seeking, curiosity, and attention: Computational and neural mechanisms.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(11):585–593, 2013

    Jacqueline Gottlieb, Pierre-Yves Oudeyer, Manuel Lopes, and Adrien Baranes. Information- seeking, curiosity, and attention: Computational and neural mechanisms.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(11):585–593, 2013

    2013

  40. [40]

    Kalina Christoff, Zachary C Irving, Kieran C. R. Fox, R Nathan Spreng, and Jessica R Andrews-Hanna. Mind-wandering as spontaneous thought: A dynamic framework.Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17(11):718–731, 2016

    2016

  41. [41]

    Strategic experimentation.Econometrica, 67(2):349– 374, 1999

    Patrick Bolton and Christopher Harris. Strategic experimentation.Econometrica, 67(2):349– 374, 1999

    1999

  42. [42]

    Strategic experimentation with exponential bandits.Econometrica, 73(1):39–68, 2005

    Godfrey Keller, Sven Rady, and Martin Cripps. Strategic experimentation with exponential bandits.Econometrica, 73(1):39–68, 2005

    2005

  43. [43]

    Strategic experimentation with poisson bandits.Theoretical Economics, 5(2):275–311, 2010

    Godfrey Keller and Sven Rady. Strategic experimentation with poisson bandits.Theoretical Economics, 5(2):275–311, 2010. 33

    2010

  44. [44]

    Path creation, path dependence and breaking away from the path: Re-examining the case of nokia.Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 11(2):16–27, 2016

    Jens Wang, Jonas Hedman, and Virpi Kristiina Tuunainen. Path creation, path dependence and breaking away from the path: Re-examining the case of nokia.Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 11(2):16–27, 2016

    2016

  45. [45]

    Final report on the accident on 1st june 2009 to the airbus a330-203 registered f-gzcp operated by air france flight af 447 rio de janeiro–paris

    Bureau d’Enquˆ etes et d’Analyses pour la S´ ecurit´ e de l’Aviation Civile. Final report on the accident on 1st june 2009 to the airbus a330-203 registered f-gzcp operated by air france flight af 447 rio de janeiro–paris. Technical report, BEA, Le Bourget, France, 2012

    2009

  46. [46]

    The tragic crash of flight af447 shows the unlikely but catastrophic consequences of automation.Harvard Business Review, 2017

    Nick Oliver, Thomas Calvard, and Kristina Potoˇ cnik. The tragic crash of flight af447 shows the unlikely but catastrophic consequences of automation.Harvard Business Review, 2017

    2017

  47. [47]

    The uneven impact of generative ai on entrepreneurial performance

    Nicholas Otis, Rowan Clarke, Solene Delecourt, David Holtz, and Rembrand Koning. The uneven impact of generative ai on entrepreneurial performance. 2024

    2024

  48. [48]

    Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus.Nature, pages 1–7, 2026

    Qianyue Hao, Fengli Xu, Yong Li, and James Evans. Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus.Nature, pages 1–7, 2026

    2026

  49. [49]

    pivot penalties

    Crispin Gardiner.Stochastic Methods: A Handbook for the Natural and Social Sciences. Springer, 2009. Author Contributions BBdesigned the research, developed the model, and wrote the manuscript. Acknowledgements and Disclosures The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of this article. 34 A Appendix: Responsivene...

    2009