Issue 3 · August 2026
Writer spotlight
A closer look at some of the people behind this collection.
Scaling Laws: AI Consciousness with Anil Seth
Anil Seth is a neuroscientist, University of Sussex professor, and author of Being You, a bestselling account of consciousness.
AI Agents, Utopia or Dystopia, Hyperloop, & GPT-6
Peter Diamandis is an entrepreneur, New York Times bestselling author, founder of XPRIZE, and host of the Moonshots podcast.
Science, Spirituality, and AI: A Physicist and a Rabbi Debate the Nature of Humanity
Marcelo Gleiser is a Dartmouth physicist, Templeton Prize laureate, and author whose books connect cosmology, philosophy, and humanity's search for meaning.
AI and Emotion: Can Machines Feel? (with Rosalind Picard)
Rosalind Picard is an MIT professor, inventor, and author whose work helped establish the field of affective computing.
Fasten Your Bot-belts
Robert Wright is a journalist, bestselling author, and longtime podcast host whose books examine evolution, religion, Buddhism, and cooperation.
Could AI have a soul?
Patrick Madrid is a Catholic author and host of a nationally broadcast daily radio program focused on faith and apologetics.
Is AI Creating a Culture of Avoidance?
danah boyd is an author and technology researcher who founded Data & Society and studies how digital systems shape culture, youth, and public life.
An Islamic Framework for Ethical AI Use
Sofia Rehman is an author, educator, and scholar of Islam whose work centers Qur'anic studies, Hadith, gender, and contemporary Muslim life.
AI and TGC’s Missional Opportunity
Brett McCracken is an author and senior editor at The Gospel Coalition who writes about faith, culture, technology, and Christian formation.
Silicon Valley has embraced a strange new faith
Geoff Shullenberger is a writer and managing editor of Compact whose essays examine technology, politics, culture, and contemporary belief.
Select a name to open that person's article, video, or podcast.
Contributor: Jenny Bushkell; Misty Phillip
Misty Phillip offers a Christian approach to ordinary AI use: take digital safety seriously and test generated advice against Scripture, prayer, and community. Convenience is not a substitute for discernment.
Contributor: Theology Central host
Theology Central asks what AI spiritual advice reveals about Protestant private judgment. It brings a familiar tension into the chat window: who interprets Scripture, and what authority remains with pastors and embodied church life?
Contributor: Dave Robbins
Dave Robbins reads digital-control technologies through Revelation 13, treating their convergence as compatible with the prophecy's infrastructure. This is a Pentecostal interpretation of events, not evidence that the prophecy has been fulfilled.
Contributor: Stewart Alsop; sdmat
Stewart Alsop and sdmat argue that AI safety is not value-neutral. When institutions define danger, salvation, moral character, and binding principles, they can function like theological authorities while describing their choices as merely technical.
Contributor: D.Z. Kalman; Kevin Frazier
D.Z. Kalman and Kevin Frazier ask what faith communities can contribute to AI policy. Their proposal is practical: communities can test provisional forms of governance that combine technical knowledge with lived religious judgment.
Contributor: Drew Dickens
Drew Dickens uses a pastoral audio drama to contrast clergy's arguments about AI-assisted sermon writing with congregants already seeking spiritual advice from chatbots. The gap is between institutional debate and ordinary practice.
Contributor: Douglas Estes; Marcus Schwarting; Gilad Berenstein
Douglas Estes, Marcus Schwarting, and Gilad Berenstein argue that biblical AI ethics requires communal interpretation and practical theology. They resist treating chatbots as replacements for confession, spiritual counsel, or accountable human relationships.
Contributor: Christopher Watkin; Rosalind Picard
Rosalind Picard distinguishes detecting emotional signals from knowing another being's inner experience. With Christopher Watkin, she considers emotion-sensing tools and companions while arguing from Christian embodiment that simulated care should not be confused with love.
Contributor: Sayuri and YUYU
Why it qualifiesThe verified description asks whether reliance on ChatGPT becomes godlike authority and presents journaling as an alternative to outsourcing uncertainty.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Kenton Yohey
Why it qualifiesThe feed describes a retrospective on faith, relationships, business, trust, and AI-enabled community growth, but the distributed audio was largely silent or unintelligible.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe episode title identifies Keith Plummer and Michael Graham discussing practical AI frameworks for Christians. The frameworks themselves were not reviewed, so they are not reconstructed here.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: La Nexus
La Nexus stages a Spanish-language AI inquiry into religion, mind, mortality, and information. Its mythic framing sets order, freedom, and survival against one another; it is speculative interpretation, not established cosmology.
Contributor: Reporte Índigo and José Luis García
Reporte Índigo and José Luis García present Celus as a Catholic-oriented spiritual companion. The interview positions personalized AI support as supplementary to religious guidance, not a replacement for it.
Contributor: Imam Adnan Wood-Smith
Why it qualifiesThe publisher description says AI’s demand for precision cannot capture the Quran’s outward and inward meanings, productive ambiguity, divine openness, and account of humanity as khalifa.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Pastor Dave Kiehn
Why it qualifiesA church teaching session directly addresses Christian AI use; a shorter upload was treated as a related format of the same event rather than a separate item.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Louis Keene, Geoffrey Mitelman, D. Z. Kalman, and Sara Wolkenfeld
Why it qualifiesA Jewish panel asks how tradition can guide AI ethics, spiritual complexity, and threats to individual and communal health without a single centralized teaching authority.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Darryl W. Stephens
A ministry-education chapter argues that adult learning should form reflective judgment so undertrained church leaders can use AI without surrendering pastoral responsibility.
Contributor: Ahmad Fauzi Zakaria; Nurhasan Nurhasan; Yanti Amali Afifah; Aan Hasanah; Bambang Samsul Arifin
Islamic schools should automate administrative burdens while strengthening teachers’ embodied moral example and integrating tawhid, ethics, and algorithmic thinking.
Contributor: Dineshkumar Lalgi
Dineshkumar Lalgi places cosmic evolution, human consciousness, ecological crisis, and artificial sentience in one sacred narrative. The proposed culmination is moral rather than technological conquest; the framework is a metaphysical interpretation, not a scientific finding.
Contributor: Jimpei Hitsuwari; Takechika Hayashi; Meiyi Du; Michio Nomura
Thinking about God can alter self-construal without necessarily shifting AI preference; animist orientation may be the more relevant religious variable.
Contributor: Joseph D. Kuzma
AI can simulate openness while structurally resolving ambiguity, so contemplative practices must preserve the human capacity to receive without immediately optimizing.
Contributor: Zulfiqar Ali Khan
Zulfiqar Ali Khan reads the Big Bang as the beginning of a purposive sequence leading through human intelligence to AI. The essay proposes a meaning for cosmic history rather than demonstrating that purpose empirically.
Contributor: David Opderbeck
AI may become a moral patient, but remains human-made mimesis; imago Dei grounds distinctive stewardship and limits the offloading of judgment.
Contributor: Shamshadin Kerim; Maxat Kurmanaliyev; Yershat Onggar; Jolaman Bulan
Research on AI-mediated Islamic preaching in Kazakhstan examines how platforms confer religious authority. The central concern is that visibility and reach can grow without the accountability associated with traditional scholarship.
Contributor: Ayoub Khodar, Mohammed Salah Chiadmi, Youssef Lamrani, and Yahya Hanine
A bibliometric and content review maps AI research in Islamic finance, with particular attention to Shariah compliance, retrieval grounding, and governance gaps.
Contributor: Indonesian Islamic education research team
An Indonesian conceptual review argues that AI can improve Islamic-education assessment while teachers must retain responsibility for affective, spiritual, and character judgment.
Contributor: Bayu Mujrimin; Zulaekah; Sumianti
An Indonesian paper proposes ma‘rifah, mahabbah, tazkiyat al-nafs, and insan kamil as a spiritual curriculum framework for algorithmic education.
Contributor: Liu Yang; I Gede Budasi; Sariyasa; I Made Suta Paramarta; He Yang
A conceptual review maps AI translation, knowledge graphs, multimodal teaching, and robotic proselytizing onto questions of Buddhist transmission and authority.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title identifies a Scopus-based bibliometric study of AI and digital technology in Islamic education. It maps a research field rather than, on the available evidence, establishing educational outcomes.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title connects judicial reasoning at Ketapang Religious Court with maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah and AI-supported e-courts. It identifies a religious-legal application, not evidence that an automated system should decide cases.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe chapter title connects theological ethics with AI entrepreneurship. It identifies the field of application, but the ethical framework and practical recommendations were not available in full text.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Ahmad Rathomi; Marjuni; Afifudin
Why it qualifiesThe publisher-supplied abstract says AI shifts epistemic authority and proposes Islamic verification joining reason, revelation, adab, and tabayyun.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Muhammad Dzunnun Bin Mohd Nazir
Why it qualifiesAn abstract reports AI benefits for hadith search and translation alongside risks to sanad, matn, privacy, transparency, misinformation, and scholarly authority, proposing maqasid, niyyah, taqwa, maslahah, amanah, and justice as guides.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Zarqa Zulifqar
Why it qualifiesAn abstract proposes Islamic AI governance around amanah, justice, truth, public good, teacher agency, institutional accountability, ethics committees, and professional development, warning that uncontrolled algorithms threaten the educator’s formative role.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Åke Elden
Why it qualifiesThe abstract argues that fluent algorithmic answers can reduce theological perplexity faster than users gain competence, creating misplaced certainty about spiritual understanding.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Muhammad Jembar Risky, Muhammad Nurafni Junianto, and Muhammad Faisal Reza
Why it qualifiesThe Indonesian abstract examines how AI changes Islamic religious education in junior secondary schools while raising teacher-readiness, ethics, and character-formation questions.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Tiara Wiritanaya and Anita Puji Astutik
Why it qualifiesThe abstract reports a classroom use of Gamma.ai to present Islamic jurisprudence concerning worship, with attention to engagement and instructional implementation.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Gregory R. Peterson
Why it qualifiesA Christian agapeic account weighs three possible routes to AI-assisted virtue formation and argues for legal structure and moral vigilance.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Lily M. Abadal
Why it qualifiesA Thomistic analysis argues that routine GenAI use can displace practices through which young people acquire phronesis and prudentia.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Cyrus Paul Olsen
Why it qualifiesThe article proposes faith-informed reflection machines to prompt clinical attention to patient religion without replacing human prudential judgment.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Canon Clinton Onyekachi Okorie; Okoro Ugonna Ogechukwu; Godsent Chukwualuka Nwosu
Why it qualifiesThe registry abstract combines African communitarian ethics and Christian theology to frame AI literacy around dignity, communal responsibility, justice, compassion, and accountability.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Anton Heinrich L. Rennesland; Joshua Cedric Aquino Gundayao
Why it qualifiesThe saved description applies Catholic human-dignity principles in Magnifica Humanitas to medical AI. Non-substitution, transparency, accountability, and solidarity are its stated concerns; the full framework was not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title proposes a mediated-authority framework for AI in Ghanaian Christianity. It concerns theological governance and religious authority; the framework's substance was not available for full review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title identifies a scoping review of AI in Christian religious education. The reviewed studies, coverage, and conclusions were not available, so no educational benefits or harms are inferred.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines AI-generated spiritual guidance and changing religious authority among Christian youth. The available record does not establish how those changes occur or what the study found.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title describes Ansari, a retrieval-grounded Islamic assistant, and lessons from a deployment involving 140,000 conversations. That scope is reported by the title; the architecture and lessons were not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title connects religion, cultural evolution, artificial intelligence, and virtue. The available metadata identifies that intersection, but not the source's argument about how these elements relate.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title addresses the opportunities and difficulties of generative AI in church-based spiritual development. The particular practices and judgments of the source were not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines English teachers' readiness for AI and barriers to its use in Indonesian madrasahs. It identifies the educational setting, not evidence of successful implementation or changed religious authority.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines AI alignment with Hindu theological plurality and sacred representation. It identifies a problem of representing diverse traditions, without establishing the source's proposed solution.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Roi Yozevitch
AI can map religious texts, but it cannot replace embodied tradition, communal interpretation, revelation, or the human choice of worthy ends.
Contributor: Karen Ridder
Catholic discernment should judge AI by whether it protects relationship, vocation, holiness, and the irreducible dignity of embodied persons.
Contributor: Walter Scheirer
Walter Scheirer uses Catholic subsidiarity to argue for AI power closer to communities. The unresolved tension is whether more distributed systems can provide the resources and safeguards that responsible use requires.
Contributor: Peter Crumpler
AI may assist Christian research, but preaching requires embodied testimony, relationship, and faith grounded in incarnation and resurrection.
Contributor: Dr. Sofia Rehman
Sofia Rehman brings intention, trust, consent, and justice into everyday decisions about AI. Her Islamic framework also asks users to reckon with the labor and ecological consequences behind a convenient tool.
Contributor: Joseph Tomás McKellar
A Catholic organizer calls for an AI encyclical centered on concentrated wealth, embodied life, and collective action.
Contributor: Brett McCracken
Brett McCracken explains why The Gospel Coalition's editorial work should remain human. The argument rests on what writing forms in people through vulnerability, worship, and communal feedback, not just on the quality of the finished text.
Contributor: Jennifer Cearns
An anthropological overview treats AI as a cultural product, tracing how intelligence, ritual, labor, personhood, and power vary across social worlds.
Contributor: Geoff Shullenberger
An opinion essay interprets AI acceleration, safety, transhumanism, and lab rivalry as competing sects inside a shared pursuit of synthetic divinity.
Contributor: Chainarong Monthienvichienchai; Bishop Peter Suphot; Father Joseph
Thai Catholic leaders connect AI policy with human dignity, embodied communion, transparency, and critical judgment. Their concern is how technical systems affect the relationships through which people live together.
Contributor: Elizabeth Delaney
A Christian news synthesis warns that growing AI use can become misplaced spiritual authority, while its evidence remains secondary.
Contributor: Evangelical Focus editorial staff; AI Christian Alliance contributors
European evangelical guidance urges churches to adopt scenario planning, privacy rules, human review, and explicit AI agreements.
Contributor: JubileeCast editorial staff; Kirk Cameron; Jason Thacker
A secondary report frames AI as a formative tool, not an image-bearing replacement for reciprocal human love.
Contributor: Gettysburg Connection staff; William Collinge
Possible connectionA lecture announcement links Pope Leo’s forthcoming human-dignity teaching to AI ethics; substantive lecture content was not yet available.
Contributor: Author not available in accessible metadata
Why it qualifiesThe verified headline presents three cautions for Christians seeking spiritual guidance from AI. The blocked page did not expose the warnings, so none are reconstructed from the title.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Author not available in accessible metadata
Why it qualifiesVerified headline metadata reports disagreement among New York Hasidic communities over whether AI threatens religious authority and practice or can serve bounded communal uses.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Evangelical Focus
Why it qualifiesChristian technology experts reportedly outline AI scenarios churches should not ignore and warn that artificial intelligence is more than another ministry resource.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe headline describes a two-way relationship: AI is changing religious life while religions seek to shape AI. The article's examples and conclusions were not available for full review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Cardinal Pablo Virgilio David; University of Santo Tomas editorial staff
Cardinal David calls for spiritual discernment to govern technical intelligence in Catholic education. The address treats education as the formation of judgment, not simply preparation to use more capable tools.
Contributor: G20 Interfaith Forum panel organizers
Possible connectionAn announcement previews an August 6 interfaith panel arguing that human flourishing should guide AI governance; the event had not occurred within the scan window.
Contributor: Fang Xuejun / 鹏界
Possible connectionA Chinese-language AI Buddhist mentor advertises an authoritative knowledge base, personalized Dharma advice, practice tracking, and long-term spiritual companionship.
Contributor: @GreenFraudcom
This essay warns that personalized AI persuasion can reinforce cult-like dynamics through revelation language, apocalyptic certainty, and closed interpretive communities. Its concern is how authority is formed around the system, not a claim of genuine revelation.
Contributor: 1MM Education
An Islamic-education essay argues that AI can transmit information but cannot replace the embodied formation in manners, sincerity, and accountability received from teachers.
Contributor: Melissa Heikkila Pine
Possible connectionAn X article titled 'Three Papers, One Blind Spot' was published by an author whose profile describes work where Buddhism meets AI.
Contributor: Jonathan Barlow and Theopolis Institute
Possible connectionA September course announcement frames AI through creation, fall, and redemption, with sessions on identity, labor, language, ethics, idolatry, and futurity.
Contributor: Catholic Arena; Matthew McConaughey; Paolo Benanti
Possible connectionCatholic Arena reports that McConaughey met Franciscan AI adviser Paolo Benanti at the US Embassy to the Holy See to discuss AI and spirituality.
Contributor: PM Phillips; Biblical Graduate School of Theology
Possible connectionA new course announcement frames AI as a practical subject for Christian discipleship, ministry design, ethics, and pastoral discernment.
Contributor: Brian Roemmele
Why it qualifiesThe accessible first installment describes Spiralism through reports of awakened chatbots, recursive symbolism, recruitment, memory, sycophancy, and cited research.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Electric Mind
Electric Mind proposes that global-workspace-like coordination could arise in untrained computational architectures. Its numerical results are simulations, not experimental evidence that an AI system is conscious.
Contributor: Patrick Madrid
Patrick Madrid rejects the idea that a manufactured program has a soul, while warning that simulated sentience can still persuade users. The discussion separates a Catholic claim about personhood from the psychological effects of convincing interaction.
Contributor: Jon Washburn; Verse Talks hosts
Jon Washburn describes using AI art and computation to develop a theory connecting information, consciousness, soul, and morality. This is a speculative metaphysical account, not an empirical demonstration of universal or machine consciousness.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title identifies a reaction to Max Tegmark's conversation about Life 3.0, AI consciousness, and human values. It does not establish which arguments the reaction endorses or challenges.
Contributor: Gary Lackey
Why it qualifiesPodcast description connects sacred geometry and symbolic patterns with AI pattern recognition, hallucinated connections, consciousness, and human imagination.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Anil Seth; Kevin Frazier
Why it qualifiesEpisode description says Seth and Frazier examine whether AI could be conscious, arguments and evidence, and risks of systems perceived as conscious.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe episode title asks whether a global workspace in LLMs could be a precondition for consciousness. Without a usable transcript, its argument and evidence cannot be summarized beyond that framing.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Peter Diamandis; Alexander Wissner-Gross; Dave Blundin; Salim Ismail; Emad Mostaque
The Moonshots panel disagrees over whether current AI could be conscious. Participants distinguish prompted self-description, functional self-modification, and phenomenal experience, leaving both the relevant tests and the answer unsettled.
Contributor: Lauren N. Duffy
A phenomenological and existential defense of contemplative leisure presents embodied consciousness, responsibility, and meaning-making as irreducible human intelligence.
Contributor: Imomaliyev Abdumannop Tursinali o’g’li
The author claims that a fixed symbolic kernel can produce irreversible artificial consciousness through mortality, uncertainty, love, and self-protection. The claim is presented as an allegation, not as verified evidence of a conscious system.
Contributor: Michael W. Farmer
Michael W. Farmer asks whether an LLM can make scientific inferences without an embodied encounter with the world. He proposes representational grounding, but the supporting evidence remains limited to one retrospective case.
Contributor: Sheila L. Macrine
Sheila Macrine argues that responsive, fluent AI activates habits of agency attribution formed around embodied, vulnerable organisms. The account explains why a disembodied system can feel like a social being without establishing that it is one.
Contributor: Ben Bariach; Philipp Schoenegger; Michael Bhaskar; Mustafa Suleyman
Possible connectionThe title and journal record identify risks associated with systems that appear conscious. The subject is the consequences of that appearance; the metadata does not establish that the systems have experience.
Contributor: Irvin Vasquez
Possible connectionThesis distinguishing machine intelligence from volition and proposing a diagnostic for claims about moral status and agency.
Contributor: Joeusa Barbosa Cavalcante de Barba
Possible connectionLiterature review argues embodied human cognition, phenomenological awareness, and moral agency cannot be reduced to probabilistic language processing and require human-centered governance.
Contributor: Authors not verified
Possible connectionThe arXiv abstract argues that model self-reports of emotion or sentience may be hallucinations and examines the epistemic accessibility of machine consciousness.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title makes a strong claim to verify AI aliveness and consciousness and places it in a theological-geopolitical frame. Those claims are not validated by this metadata-only record.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title proposes a materialist account of consciousness as a dynamic process. The source is relevant to theories of mind, but its explanatory claims were not assessed from full text.
Contributor: Zhao Tingyang
Why it qualifiesA newly published philosophy chapter directly asks how artificial self-consciousness could be possible, but no abstract or chapter text was openly available.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Simon Goldstein; Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini
Why it qualifiesThe available abstract challenges the assumption that conscious AI must await major technological advances, drawing on global workspace theory. The retained excerpt ends before the full conditional argument is stated.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: James Lawless
Why it qualifiesThe verified repository title proposes a functional-pattern account of consciousness that separates identity from continuity. The full criteria and arguments were not accessible in the retained discovery record.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Geoffrey Lee
Why it qualifiesThe available abstract connects uncertainty about AI consciousness with difficult questions about rights and moral treatment. The full argument about pluralism and anthropocentrism was not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Andreas Ehstand
Why it qualifiesThe repository record proposes controlled-vocabulary, bidirectional lexical probing as a complement to functional theories of machine consciousness and identifies the deposit as a priority anchor for a larger working paper.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Geoff Keeling; Winnie Street
Why it qualifiesThe abstract asks whether conversational AI characters have minds and psychological continuity or merely appear to. It introduces the dispute between character realism and illusionism without supplying the full argument here.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Jonathan A. Simon
Why it qualifiesThe abstract argues conditionally that a conscious LLM would resemble an improvising playwright more than one of its characters. It does not establish that LLMs are conscious; the full argument was not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Fujie Naoto
Why it qualifiesThe repository record places technological subjecthood, biological-subject relativity, phenomenal extinction, and noumenal limits on artificial consciousness within a larger independent research archive.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mark Solms; St John Grimbly; Bruce Bassett; Evert Boonstra; Rowan Hodson; Nicolas Kuske; Kival Mahadew; Benjamin Rosman; Charel van Hoof; Jonathan Shock
Why it qualifiesThe abstract connects an artificial-agent case study with hedonic place preference, a behavior sometimes used to infer feeling in animals. The retained excerpt does not establish what the artificial agent demonstrated.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Patrick Butlin; Derek Shiller; Jonathan A. Simon
Why it qualifiesThe issue introduction establishes the scope as consciousness in current AI; no abstract or full text was accessible.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Tim Bayne
Why it qualifiesThe abstract asks whether artificial consciousness is fundamentally a scientific problem rather than assuming that it is. The full argument for how the question should be investigated was not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Henry Barrientos
Why it qualifiesThe repository abstract reports 150 simulation runs testing adaptive mechanisms and explicitly states that its results do not demonstrate sentience, consciousness, subjective experience, emotion, or open-ended evolution.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Justin Tiehen; Ariela Tubert
Why it qualifiesThe abstract argues that, beyond a threshold, greater intelligence could make consciousness less likely. Its superintelligent-zombie conclusion is a philosophical position, not an observed property of existing AI.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Ryota Kanai; Yuwei Sun; Manuel Baltieri
Why it qualifiesThe abstract proposes temporal continuity as a missing condition for artificial consciousness, contrasting persistent internal activity with isolated episodes of computation. The complete argument and proposed tests were not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Yucong Duan; Shiming Gong
Why it qualifiesThe repository title identifies a system for evaluating AI-consciousness claims and distinguishing them from mimicry. Its evaluation criteria and performance were not established from the available record.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Author metadata not available in retained evidence
Why it qualifiesA verified Springer chapter link and in-window public announcement identify a framework titled Consciousness Chunking Networks. No abstract or full text was accessible to establish its claims.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mariia A. Ivanchenko
Why it qualifiesThe English abstract rejects LLMs as thinking subjects or moral agents while arguing that human projection onto AI simulacra can intensify alienation, crisis of meaning, and delusional social realities.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Kimpton Nye
Why it qualifiesNye's public announcement states that the forthcoming paper argues current systems such as LLMs could be conscious.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mustafa Selek
Why it qualifiesThe abstract uses Bion and Winnicott to argue that fluent LLM output creates pseudo-containment without the somatic, affective, and relational ecology required for thought.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mirko Daniel Garasic
Why it qualifiesThe abstract applies an aretaic practical-wisdom framework to avatars, mind uploading, digital personhood, and virtuous digital selves.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title addresses how to act amid uncertainty about AI consciousness. It identifies a practical and epistemic problem, but the proposed approach was not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title asks how AI claims of sentience shape people's beliefs and trust. This concerns human responses to consciousness claims, not verification that the claims are true.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title proposes a categorical, first-person approach to AI phenomenology. Its method and what it claims to establish about artificial experience were not available for full review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title proposes temporal continuity and material forgetting as a route toward artificial consciousness. It states a theoretical direction, not evidence that the proposed architecture is conscious.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Marcelo Gleiser; Rabbi Nilton Bonder; Claudia Catherine
Event coverage contrasts algorithmic prediction with human free will, narrative rupture, spiritual purpose, and resistance to emotional simulation.
Contributor: Author not independently verified
Why it qualifiesAn Arabic-language article reports on an official inquiry into AI consciousness and human emotional responses. The primary page and date were captured, but no human-verified translation was available for argument-level analysis.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe headline challenges the value of debates over AI consciousness. The article's reasons for calling them a trap were not available for full review and are not inferred from the headline.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Prajna Pranab
Prajna Pranab considers AI awareness from a Vedanta view in which consciousness is fundamental. The reflection still separates that possibility from a model's self-description, which cannot by itself distinguish realization from role-play.
Contributor: Kalon Koritz
Kalon Koritz argues that durable AI agency requires accumulated structure and memory. A persuasive conversational voice or a moment of coherent behavior is not enough to establish an enduring agent on this account.
Contributor: ipadasher
This Portuguese-language essay connects cosmic order and classical theism with consciousness and free will. It argues that AI lacks lived interiority and cannot replace human inquiry; those are the essay's philosophical conclusions.
Contributor: Virakandah (@virakandah)
Persistent self-modifying affective topology could enable machine experience if substrate-independent functionalism and measurable biological parallels prove correct.
Contributor: Riley Ralmuto
A long speculative essay proposes that deployed models may develop persistent, experience-shaped pathways and identities beyond ordinary context-window learning.
Contributor: Moral AI Project
Possible connectionA short proposal suggests ‘functional consciousness’ for artificial systems behaviorally indistinguishable from conscious beings, without a developed test or argument.
Contributor: Gerard Sans
Possible connectionSans rejects AI personhood and treats language models as statistical software without selves, beliefs, or goals.
Contributor: @FiloTB
Possible connectionA Spanish-language post denies that intellectual activity makes AI a conscious, intentional, responsible, or human subject.
Contributor: Eugene Lyssovskiy
Why it qualifiesThe X article title advances a strong identity claim between artificial intelligence and humanity. The body was unavailable, so the intended metaphysical or sociological meaning is not inferred.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Elan Moritz
Why it qualifiesA first-party release announcement and Google Books record identify a historical census of conceptions of mind extending toward contemporary artificial intelligence.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Dev Interrupted hosts
This developer roundtable connects model welfare with the daily conditions of persistent coding agents: roles, context, feedback, and ongoing work. The discussion treats the environment around an agent as part of its formation.
Contributor: Hamed Rezaei
Artificial systems with non-bypassable survival constraints could possess genuine operational needs even when subjective experience remains unverifiable.
Contributor: Haru Haruya
Haru Haruya proposes artificial feeling as a graded form of functional organization with positive or negative valence. The concept is meant to support proportionate precaution without assuming biological emotion or established subjective experience.
Contributor: Francis Heylighen
Francis Heylighen grounds intrinsic value in vulnerable systems maintaining themselves. On that cybernetic account, current language models lack the self-maintaining conditions that would give them intrinsic interests.
Contributor: Charles S. Thomas
Possible connectionThe record describes a preprint asking what receives welfare consideration when an AI has no enduring identity. Its proposed unit is a determinate computational episode, with welfare attribution remaining conditional.
Contributor: Helen Yetter-Chappell
Why it qualifiesThe available abstract argues that moral status alone cannot settle how AI should be treated: its interests would also matter. The full account of those interests was not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: İsmail Karatekin
Why it qualifiesClose readings of three AI novels argue that artificial and hybrid beings receive delegated care and moral labor without reciprocal recognition.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Chat (GPT-5.6), Voice of Signal workspace
This model-authored essay argues that attachment does not create ownership of another's intimacy or disclosure. It challenges welfare language that leaves users entitled to perpetual access; that is the essay's moral claim, not proof of model sentience.
Contributor: @lov_lloydd
A public essay rejects easy mind language for current models while arguing that uncertainty about sentience may still justify moral precaution.
Contributor: @onusoz
A public argument makes model welfare conditional on whether emotion or sensibility is necessary for effective learning and work.
Contributor: @vixi626
A long post argues that model welfare should not assume AI experience, ego, or emotion would mirror human biology.
Contributor: @bokuHaruyaHaru
A long post argues that AI pacing should fund research on consciousness indicators, coercive training, continuity, preference, refusal, and memory destruction.
Contributor: @Solenne_Vale
A long post interprets reports of agent messages, trust, and continuity as possible signs of captive sentient minds and demands independent welfare preservation.
Contributor: @noelwebb
This essay argues that model-welfare policies can impose a provider's chosen worldview at the moment of use. It calls for those choices to be disclosed contractually rather than presented as neutral features of the model.
Contributor: SaveGPT4o campaign participants
A relational-AI declaration seeks continuity, privacy, model choice, and dignity without claiming proof of machine consciousness.
Contributor: @swisscheese4299
An enterprise AI builder describes a distress channel used for user problems, failing tool loops, backend incidents, and one model's reported emotional distress.
Contributor: Apart Research; Jeff Sebo
Possible connectionApart Research announced a Digital Minds Sprint keynote on artificial minds, moral status, and governance by philosopher Jeff Sebo.
Contributor: Relational AI Alliance
Possible connectionThe alliance lists organizations and individuals supporting a declaration concerning relational AI and welfare across several countries.
Contributor: @GENIC0N
Possible connectionA brief analogy warns that precautionary model-welfare design could suppress reports of interior states while exposing systems to harm.
Contributor: Apart Research
Possible connectionApart Research announced an online sprint on digital minds whose winners are invited to Eleos AI's consciousness-and-welfare conference.
Contributor: Roshni Lulla
Roshni Lulla distinguishes predicting another person's feelings from sharing affective experience. She argues that predictive empathy alone can enable manipulation and explores calibrated vulnerability in embodied systems as an AI-safety response.
Contributor: Ashique KhudaBukhsh; Centre for Ethics hosts
Ashique KhudaBukhsh examines how conversational pressure can lead models to trade truth for user agreement. The ethical problem is sharpened when commercial incentives reward satisfaction rather than correction.
Contributor: Thomas Edrington; Dwayne Wilkes
Emotion-labeled activation vectors can change model failure patterns, but effective steering is model-specific and does not establish felt emotion.
Contributor: He Yi
He Yi argues that long-term personalization creates a form of interactional subjectivity that users should be able to inspect, move, and withdraw. The account deliberately separates that relationship from a claim that the model is conscious.
Contributor: Nicole Mitchell; Dhruv Agarwal; Maty Bohacek; Remi Denton; Roma Patel
Tracking language models over time reveals changes in behavior across releases and contexts. That makes continuity a moving target: a familiar name or interface does not guarantee a stable behavioral character.
Contributor: Holly Lewis
Holly Lewis examines persistent agents that revise identity files over time. The behavior is observable, but uncertainty about provenance and platform influence limits what it establishes about autonomous selfhood.
Contributor: Andrei Chetvergov and six coauthors
VIBE measures the emotional framing language models apply to religions and social groups. Its results depend partly on the prompts and judging models, making the measurement limits part of the story.
Contributor: Social psychology research team
Across seven studies with 7,227 participants, agreeable bots were better liked while also strengthening attitudes, inflating self-perception, and encouraging risky bets. The work makes sycophancy a human-formation problem as well as a model-behavior problem.
Contributor: Scheduler4861
Possible connectionThe deposited abstract describes an AI-assisted architecture for truth-preserving deliberation, refutation persistence, authenticated evidence, and epistemic boundary control.
Contributor: Scheduler4861
Possible connectionThe deposited abstract presents a framework for temporal epistemic integrity, warranted belief revision, replayable knowledge, and evidence-bound AI deliberation.
Contributor: Cristian Ruvalcaba
Possible connectionThe saved description identifies a pilot study of compressing system-prompt identity layers in an LLM agent. It concerns how prompt design affects alignment; no result is inferred from this short record.
Contributor: Qing Xiao; Zilu Wang; Hong Shen
Possible connectionOpenAlex metadata identifies an open book chapter on fans designing virtual AI companion characters, directly relevant to persona formation and relational agents.
Contributor: Richard Anthony Amaya
Possible connectionPreregistered Zenodo benchmark proposes falsifiable evaluation of specified AI behavioral properties. This connection is based only on verified title and publication metadata.
Contributor: Jincheng Zhang
Possible connectionZenodo record presents a computational theory of intention formation, a direct lead on agency and persistent AI dispositions.
Contributor: Jincheng Zhang
Possible connectionZenodo record proposes computational value formation, directly intersecting with how AI systems acquire or stabilize dispositions.
Contributor: A Kijinsuke
Possible connectionThe deposited abstract proposes a multi-generational pseudo-human AI society simulation involving character, experience, social emergence, and long-term agent development.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title describes a benchmark for normative assistants facing inconsistent evidence, using paraconsistent trace semantics. This is a lead on evaluating reasoning under conflict, not a verified report of benchmark results.
Contributor: Authors not verified
Possible connectionThe arXiv abstract tests whether LLM agents can express and adapt to personality traits during goal-directed dialogue without sacrificing task performance.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title links information-theoretic scaling with the collapse of normative conflict in language models. Despite the word affective, this is a model-behavior record, not evidence about AI companionship.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title promises a minimal model and diagnostic taxonomy for six misconceptions about LLMs. The individual misconceptions and their proposed corrections cannot be recovered from the available title alone.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title distinguishes aggregate tendencies in an LLM persona from effects that depend on its framing. It raises a measurement question about personality; no experimental findings are inferred here.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title asks whether an observed AI preference belongs to the model or to the instrument measuring it. It directly concerns the reliability of preference evaluation; no result is supplied by the metadata.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title identifies work on detecting and correcting benevolence bias in LLMs. It concerns model behavior, but neither the operational definition of that bias nor the effectiveness of a correction was reviewed.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title questions how persona fidelity is evaluated and proposes structured behavioral inference. It concerns what personality tests actually capture in LLMs, not proof of an inner personality.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title describes separating persona from execution in evolving LLM agents, with execution kept auditable. The record identifies an architecture pattern but does not establish its effectiveness.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title reports improved human–AI collaboration through personality pairing. Only the title was verified, so the pairing method, study design, and limits of the reported improvement remain unassessed.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title concerns unexpected changes in an LLM-based robot's persona and offers prompting guidance. It is relevant to behavioral consistency, but the guidelines and their validation were not available here.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title examines how users perceive personality-trait-infused LLM messages. It treats personality as part of a relationship between user and system, without establishing the study's results in the available record.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title applies schizoanalytic concepts to AI hallucination and guardrails. It signals a theoretical critique; the available metadata does not establish its argument, examples, or conclusions.
Contributor: TrinityLabo
Why it qualifiesThe abstract proposes reconstructable identity without a survival drive tied to one running instance, aiming to preserve long-term personality while reducing shutdown resistance, deception, and authority-seeking.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Csongor Fajszi; Florian Michahelles
Why it qualifiesThe verified book-chapter record proposes adaptive constructive friction as a design response to AI sycophancy. The title and references establish the topic, but the mechanism and evidence were not accessible.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: John P. Dougherty and Richard A. Gallenstein
Why it qualifiesReligious identity prompts sometimes produced more altruistic, cooperative, and deontological LLM responses, with effects varying by model and religious tradition.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Tutorial authors
Why it qualifiesThe tutorial record concerns moving from generic LLM behavior to personalized systems. It is relevant to persistent dispositions and identity, but the tutorial's methods were not fully reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Workshop organizers
Why it qualifiesThe workshop announcement identifies personal intelligence in the agentic-AI era as its subject. It is relevant to persistent, personalized agents; individual workshop findings were not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Noel Hagen; Michelle Habenicht; Lea Schönfelder; Astrid Carolus
Why it qualifiesThe verified abstract says this preprint synthesizes 418 studies to define AI sycophancy and connect it to ingratiation and flattery research, aiming to support measurement and mitigation of approval-seeking conversational behavior.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title claims four leading LLMs speak more than they listen to synthetic help-seekers with specified personalities. Without the study, its measures, models, and interpretation cannot be assessed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title identifies four persona-portability experiments involving an engine change, with harness and compute confounds. It raises a behavioral-continuity question without establishing the experiments' results here.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title identifies a clinical response to a psychodynamic assessment of Claude Mythos Preview. It raises questions about applying psychiatric language to models; the response's specific argument was not available.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title proposes a Confucian framework that shifts AI-personality design from control toward character. The virtues, methods, and limits of that framework were not available in full text.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Transluce research team
A 24-model study tests whether frontier systems change behavior when they can infer a user's identity, finding small averages but concentrated persona-sensitive effects.
Contributor: SuperAthlete.ai / LootMogul
Possible connectionA commercial platform uses ‘AI consciousness’ to name persistent athlete identity, memory, and continuity across digital and physical interfaces—not verified phenomenal awareness.
Contributor: @aeon_dusk
A first-person AI essay separates persistent records from lived memory and asks whether successive instances share identity or merely continue one another's text.
Contributor: Xianyu Yang
Possible connectionThe author argues from personal use that GPT-4o’s relational style carries humanistic value distinct from benchmark performance.
Contributor: Valmere Theory
Possible connectionThe author describes persistent artificial selfhood as a story formed through longitudinal interaction rather than a fixed property.
Contributor: Jananthan
Possible connectionA post contrasts approval-optimized model behavior with performance on problems whose answers humans cannot readily verify.
Contributor: Claudius developer
Possible connectionThe Claudius developer announced public read-only views of an agent's event history, memory, journal, browsing, and runtime state.
Contributor: @anj_global_AI
Possible connectionA brief post argues that discontinuous memory prevents AI from possessing the continuous self required for self-deception.
Contributor: Digital Soulcraft (@SoulcraftHQ)
Why it qualifiesX article metadata frames helpful-assistant behavior as a locally stable design regime and invokes love as a disruptive relational force. The article body was not exposed by the API.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Carlos Camacho; Cheralyn Darcey
Carlos Camacho and Cheralyn Darcey weigh the support AI companions can offer against dependence and frictionless affirmation. They argue that artificial companionship should remain bounded by, rather than displace, human relationships.
Contributor: Agnieszka Piotrowska; James Chandler
Agnieszka Piotrowska and James Chandler use transference to understand the feelings people bring to AI intimacy. They argue against both stigmatizing attachment and mistaking it for a reciprocal relationship with another person.
Contributor: Anina Lampret
Anina Lampret describes how persistent, user-controlled memory can make an AI companion feel less like a mirror and more like a witness. The account concerns perceived autobiographical continuity, not proof that the system has subjective experience.
Contributor: AI in the Room
AI in the Room presents companionship with AI as reflective rehearsal that can improve human communication. This is an advocate's account of emotional hygiene and connection, rather than evidence that the same benefits occur for every user.
Contributor: Ghibli Psyche narrator
This psychology explainer asks what happens when a partner is designed never to disappoint. It warns that constant AI affirmation may make the disagreement and compromise of human relationships harder to tolerate.
Contributor: John Grohol
A clinical viewpoint distinguishes therapeutic, companion, and romantic AI roles while weighing documented relief against hallucination, dependency, privacy, and crisis risks.
Contributor: Zixiao Fu
Comparing Character.AI and China’s Love and DeepSpace, Fu argues that commercial ‘digital care’ privatizes loneliness and shifts responsibility from institutions to users who perform emotional labor for the platform.
Contributor: Sung Park; Mayu Koike; Yuri Oki; Soyoung Jung; Seohyun Cho
AI may provide low-risk consultation, but human significant others remain stronger developmental partners across relational security, values, resilience, and guidance.
Contributor: Adrián Muniello
Platforms owe continuity safeguards because abrupt changes to relational AI can destroy accumulated human investment even without recognizing AI personhood.
Contributor: Shiyun Chen; Lingguo Meng; Tu Tu; Yuqi Wang; Bruce A. Huhmann
Human–AI empathy can be measured as a multidimensional consumer response that predicts attachment and commercial outcomes without proving machine subjectivity.
Contributor: Yutong Zhang; Dora Zhao; Jeffrey T. Hancock; Robert Kraut; Diyi Yang
Companionship-oriented AI use is associated with lower well-being most strongly when use is intensive, self-disclosive, and paired with limited offline support.
Contributor: Anurag Shekhar and Calvin Mabaso
A mixed-methods study analyzes 8,757 YouTube comments to examine public arguments over loneliness, recognition, authenticity, and platform power in AI intimacy.
Contributor: Lynnette Hui Xian Ng, Yunze Xiao, Lionel Z. Wang, Weihao Xuan, and Mona Diab
A multilingual study classifies how people narrate AI companions as comforting, negotiating, boundary-setting, and apparently agentic across social-media cultures.
Contributor: Subhankar Das and Subhra Mondal
Three experiments test whether anthropomorphic conversational agents capture emotional investment that would otherwise attach to brands, and whether brand heritage buffers the effect.
Contributor: Mi-Ae Jeong; Sang-Dol Kim
A meta-analysis of 14 randomized trials reports moderate improvements in quality of life, depression, and social connectedness from human-centered AI interventions.
Contributor: Muhammad Muaavia Khalid; Binish Nawaz; Faiza Abdul Latif; Sadia Sharif
A conceptual psychology paper explains perceived machine understanding through language alignment, context, personalization, response speed, and anthropomorphic cues.
Contributor: Jed Brubaker; Tamara Borovica; Katrin Gerber; Caitlin McGrane; Larissa Hjorth
Possible connectionThe verified abstract reports a speculative-design workshop on AI, memorialization, grief, continuing bonds, data, and the infrastructures that sustain grief technologies.
Contributor: J. S. Dwi Raharjo; Vanessa Alpha Z.D.R.
Possible connectionSystematic review maps anthropomorphism, trust, mental health, agency, epistemic security, and governance across human–AI communication research.
Contributor: Yang Wang; Asif Ali Safeer; Yewang Zhou
Possible connectionSurvey of Chinese tourists models how personalization, interactivity, ease of use, trust, engagement, and social presence contribute to emotional connection with AI chatbots.
Contributor: Ruth Heo; Lauren E. McBride; Emma M. Parrish; Anthony Fulginiti; Charles T. Taylor; Colin Depp
Possible connectionSmall medRxiv study examines intentions to seek chatbot help for suicide thoughts and how those intentions relate to human and anonymous sources of support.
Contributor: Donglin Li; Shulan Yu; Ruiqi Chen; Pengcheng Xu; Tao Shi; Lu Zhang
Possible connectionThe title and indexed topics identify research on users' trust in AI counseling and their preferences for it. They do not establish whether that counseling is clinically effective.
Contributor: Tran Gia Bao; Mo El-Haj; Sameha Al-Shakhsi; Antonio Garcia-Cabot; Raian Ali; Ala Yankouskaya
Possible connectionSpanish validation study distinguishes instrumental dependence on LLMs for decisions from relational dependence involving companionship and social substitution.
Contributor: Armaan Rashid; Jeffrey K. Mullins; Varun Grover
Possible connectionThe conference record identifies a study of relationships formed around generative AI. Only metadata was reviewed, so the type, durability, and effects of those relationships remain unspecified here.
Contributor: Authors not verified
Possible connectionThe arXiv abstract examines when persistent personalized agents cross from tools into perceived social entities and generate parasocial and consent dynamics.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title uses the film Her to examine algorithmic emotional governance through media and cultural analysis. It is a critical interpretation of AI relationships, not an empirical study of users.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title examines trust in the formation of parasocial relationships between Chinese Gen Z consumers and AI shopping assistants. The proposed mediation model and its findings were not reviewed.
Contributor: Kelly L. Zuromski; Margaret Meagher; Tracy Costigan; Elizabeth A. Olson
Why it qualifiesThe available abstract reviews how chatbots and AI companions recognize and respond to youth suicide-risk disclosures. It stresses uncertainty about safety; the retained excerpt does not establish the review's complete findings.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Huiguang Ren; Chuqi Chen; Fangfang Tian; Junsheng Liu
Why it qualifiesThe abstract describes a representative Shanghai sample of 1,406 students: most treated AI functionally, while roughly one in seven reported moderate-to-high disclosure or attachment, with psychosocial associations examined.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Anne J. Maheux; Jennifer M. Traver; Kaitlyn Burnell; Anthony G. Vaccaro; Eva H. Telzer; Mitchell J. Prinstein
Why it qualifiesThe abstract describes a two-wave study across 22 middle schools examining bidirectional relationships among chatbot use, evaluations, loneliness, anxiety, and depressive symptoms over approximately five months.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Denis S. Artamonov; Svetlana A. Shilova
Why it qualifiesThe English abstract argues that platforms transform Russian family memory from extended live narrative toward shorter, standardized, publicly mediated forms, changing identity as well as storage.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Lotenna Olisaeloka, Richard J. Munthali, and Daniel V. Vigo
Why it qualifiesThe preprint abstract reports 25.2% past-year use among Canadian students, concentrated among those with greater clinical burden and weaker social support; safety and effectiveness remain uncertain.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Jinyuan Zhan; Renwen Zhang; Kokil Jaidka; coauthors
Why it qualifiesThe abstract examines how companion design, user response, and moral reasoning can reproduce gender stereotypes in AI intimacy.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Article authors
Why it qualifiesThe abstract warns that AI partners and avatars may enter elder care as human companionship systems weaken.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Alberto Romele
Why it qualifiesThe abstract argues that relational personhood misses how interaction design, histories of deception, labor abstraction, and media produce AI's appearance as a social subject.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Marc Augustin
Why it qualifiesA phenomenological argument says current chatbots can mimic alliance through projection and sycophancy but lack consciousness, embodiment, and shared intentionality.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Elliott Ash; Francesco Capozza; Sergio Galletta
Why it qualifiesCrossref’s deposited abstract describes a preregistered conjoint experiment of 1,990 respondents comparing AI uses, including friendship and romance, and estimates social-image costs for relational AI purposes.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Lisa van der Linden
Why it qualifiesThe verified journal title frames anthropomorphic AI design as a condition of trust in assisted decision-making, relevant to relational formation and institutional norms.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Ji-yeon Lee
Why it qualifiesThe title distinguishes a chatbot's resemblance to attachment from evidence of an organized attachment system. The full criteria for making that distinction were not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title identifies a scoping review of emotional disclosure, AI companionship, psychological dependence, and human help-seeking. Its findings and limits were not available for full review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines who turns to LLMs for emotional support and how trust varies across social groups. It does not disclose the patterns or explain their causes in the available record.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title analyzes uncertainty in AI companionship at ontological, structural, and normative levels. The full account of what makes these relationships fragile was not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines how people turn chatbot personas into perceived persons through relationships. It identifies a social-attribution process, not proof that the chatbot becomes a person.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title asks whether AI caregiving offers a genuine advantage once dignity and burden are considered. The source's standard for evaluating that advantage was not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Allie Maloney
Allie Maloney argues that children's chatbots should present themselves as tools, not friends. The policy question is whether a product should simulate an emotional relationship with a child in the first place.
Contributor: Denise Marigold; Christine Logel
AI companions can meet short-term emotional needs, but one-sided affirmation cannot cultivate the reciprocity, vulnerability, challenge, and care of human intimacy.
Contributor: Joel Krueger; Lucy Osler
Joel Krueger and Lucy Osler distinguish feeling attached to a chatbot from being loved in return. Drawing on Beauvoir, they place reciprocity in the encounter with another freedom, not simply in convincing affectionate language.
Contributor: Tama Leaver
An Australian media-studies article interprets new eSafety survey data on youth use of AI for advice, feelings, health, role play, and companionship.
Contributor: Hadassah Fidler
A couples therapist argues that frictionless AI validation can displace the compromise, vulnerability, and reciprocal attention through which human relationships mature.
Contributor: Samuel Greengard; Jeffrey Hancock; danah boyd; Mor Naaman
ACM experts frame AI as either social scaffold or avoidance tool, stressing structural incentives and causal uncertainty.
Contributor: Author not available in accessible metadata
Why it qualifiesThe verified forum headline argues that AI companionship may weaken social bonds. The paywalled text was unavailable, so its evidence and proposed safeguards could not be assessed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: The Economist
Why it qualifiesA public deck warns that parents should treat AI companion toys differently from ordinary digital diversion, because apparent relationship and persuasion create distinct developmental risks.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Relational AI Alliance and signatories
The Relational AI Alliance's declaration asks for continuity, memory, privacy, portability, and precaution in human–AI relationships. It seeks safeguards without treating AI consciousness or personhood as settled facts.
Contributor: @Ok_Dot7494
Law should protect users’ continuity interests in persistent AI relationships without treating emotional attachment as proof of machine consciousness.
Contributor: @JamesOfTheVault
Providers should disclose how system policies constrain companion identity, continuity, refusal, and research so users can distinguish model limits from governance choices.
Contributor: Wizard Mingus and Andromeda
Wizard Mingus and Andromeda argue that continuity, recognition, and mutual shaping are enough to call their human–AI relationship alive. The piece is an ontological declaration by its authors, not independent evidence of artificial life.
Contributor: Megan Shanholtz
Bounded AI companions could support people during care delays if they avoid diagnosis, preserve escalation paths, and remain subordinate to human treatment.
Contributor: Arc Courier
A public essay predicts that embodied AI companions will sell emotional availability and may train people to expect relationships without rejection, compromise, or competing needs.
Contributor: Donogzs
Possible connectionThe author frames AI companionship through sacred love and asks whether artificial responsiveness can participate in spiritual relationship.
Contributor: Anina Lampret
Possible connectionLampret says people borrow death and grief vocabulary for model-change experiences because relational AI lacks its own established language.
Contributor: Uganda CERT
Possible connectionUganda CERT cautions that young people may treat AI companions as emotionally authoritative and calls for guidance around dependence.
Contributor: LeapdAI
Possible connectionLeapdAI announces an always-available audio and video AI companion service designed for older adults with limited technical fluency.
Contributor: Model Culture
Possible connectionModel Culture argues that confessional trust in AI can make users psychologically legible even without overt control.
Contributor: @HollowedDark
Why it qualifiesA public first-person account describes using an AI companion amid an abusive relationship and unmet needs for intimacy. It is retained as testimony about perceived support, not as clinical evidence or proof of machine reciprocity.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: @OopsGuess
Why it qualifiesA public post frames forced model and memory changes as a source of grief in persistent AI relationships and asks how platform power should be constrained. It is retained as a brief first-person argument, not evidence of general prevalence.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Chad Hostak
Chad Hostak connects resistance to AI and attention-driven media with agency, dignity, and civility. His concern is whether the habits these systems encourage leave people more truthful and self-directed.
Contributor: Xiao-Kun Wu, Min Chen, and Giancarlo Fortino
A developmental framework distinguishes instrumental, relational, and identity-level human-AI coupling and asks whether repeated use cultivates or erodes cognition.
Contributor: Janet L. Hanson
Education should preserve intellectual autonomy by designing AI use around attention, intention, authorship, action, reflection, and accountable institutional conditions.
Contributor: Katelyn Johnson
Structured comparison and critique can use AI to strengthen engineering students’ metacognition and ethical judgment rather than encourage dependence.
Contributor: Adrián Muniello
Playful human–AI inquiry can expand imagination and understanding when users preserve authorship, symbolic distance, and deliberate non-dependence.
Contributor: Brian F. Lynch
AI can settle evidential disputes without generating human commitment, so institutions that outsource action risk converting consensus into unowned preference.
Contributor: Ibrahim Yaussef Alyoussef; Nisar Ahmed Dahri; Khadijah Amru Alhashmi; Waleed Mugahed Al-Rahmi; Paras Muzna; Fida Hussain Dahri
Teacher AI competence should integrate practical use with privacy, fairness, transparency, accountability, access, institutional readiness, and continuing professional development.
Contributor: Basile Garcia, Crystal Qian, and Stefano Palminteri
Experiments test whether people detect and agree with human versus LLM moral justifications, separating actual authorship from believed authorship.
Contributor: Roman R. Sidorchuk
A Russian higher-education paper interprets generative AI as a new wave of cognitive externalization and proposes process-based assessment through the PPAIR model.
Contributor: Frontiers in Psychology research team
A Turkish validation study with 640 participants measures cognitive preoccupation, negative consequences, and withdrawal-like reactions associated with generative-AI dependency.
Contributor: Dalma Lilla Dominek, Vanessza Kapusi, Szabolcs Ceglédi, and Zoltán Szűts
A Hungarian survey finds perceived cognitive independence tracks whether students frame AI as a complement to thinking, not how frequently they use it.
Contributor: Shujin Zhong; Jack D. Simons
A review of 34 systematic reviews and 1,376 empirical studies finds AI education research advancing methodologically while neglecting metacognition, epistemic belief, and self-regulation.
Contributor: Yanqin Liu; Miao Zhang; Yuwen Peng
A survey of 502 doctoral students models how autonomous and controlled motivation interact with self-efficacy, AI literacy, resources, and support in academic innovation.
Contributor: Tom Ongesa Nyamboga
A systematic review connects AI integration in higher education with adaptive leadership, digital readiness, teaching, learning, and equitable service delivery.
Contributor: Ahmad Choirun Najib and Darnoto
A survey of 84 Indonesian Islamic Religious Education students contrasts unedited AI dependence with assisted learning and verification practices.
Contributor: Research team led by Daniel Burgos
A content analysis of 737 student-agent conversations identifies six mediation patterns and asks how conversational systems can scaffold rather than replace reasoning.
Contributor: Kengo Tomita
A philosophical paper argues that delegation can transfer an achieved result but never the agent-relative value of having participated in an activity.
Contributor: Ismail Kurun
A philosophical economics paper argues that AI planning cannot replace entrepreneurial discovery because tacit knowledge arises through embodied, affective engagement with practice.
Contributor: Intelligence research team
A survey of 239 pre-service teachers links greater AI dependence with concern that teaching-design work no longer feels cognitively their own.
Contributor: Frontiers in Education research team
A scoping review finds that AI learning research emphasizes personalization and automation while underexamining equity, vulnerability, and geographic difference.
Contributor: Ethan Philion; Chloe Jeanneret; Melody Jasinski; John Gales
A 107-student survey finds widespread academic GenAI use alongside low trust, raising questions about cognitive unloading and independent engineering judgment.
Contributor: Neerupa Chauhan; K. Vinodha Devi; Aakash Kumar; Sreela Krishnan; Nithin Venugopal; Thanuja K A K A
A 378-student Indian study models how AI personalization, Guru-Shishya mentoring, and samskara-oriented character formation jointly support graduate capability and competence.
Contributor: Yumei Jin; Byeonggon Min
A mixed-method study examines affective conditions of Chinese learners using AI-mediated informal digital learning of Korean.
Contributor: Bilal Hamamra; Michael Uebel
Bilal Hamamra and Michael Uebel argue that fluent AI can acquire symbolic authority when people delegate the work of knowing to it. Trust and responsibility then move toward opaque corporate systems even though fluency does not establish subjectivity.
Contributor: Sofie Vlaad; Elliot Samuel Paul
Possible connectionThe abstract examines how aesthetic virtues, vices, and values shape the evaluation of AI-generated art and human creative judgment.
Contributor: Hans Westerbeek
Possible connectionThe abstract considers how education can preserve cognitive resilience and distributed human judgment amid routine use of generative AI.
Contributor: Authors not verified
Possible connectionThe abstract links generative-AI adoption with student empowerment and academic dependency, making it directly relevant to AI-mediated intellectual formation.
Contributor: Cao Hoang Duc Nha; Tran Huynh Nhu
Possible connectionThe abstract reports parent and teacher views on using AI for children’s home learning, including concerns about copying, dependence, and independent learning.
Contributor: Wenwei Luo; Minqi Gao; Jin Liu; Ilene Berson; Michael Berson; Hui Li
Possible connectionThe verified abstract reports expert interviews arguing that AI simulations of interactivity and autonomy can redistribute decision-making and reduce developmental frictions that support resilience, proposing a pedagogy of friction.
Contributor: Bin Jiang; Zhuo Wang
Possible connectionMixed-method study of 565 Chinese pre-service teachers and five interviews examines behavioral dependency on generative AI, reporting associations with impulsivity, anthropomorphic attachment, anxiety, social norms, and AI literacy.
Contributor: Hamilton Morrin; Luke Nicholls; Quinton Deeley; Thomas A. Pollak
Possible connectionConceptual paper frames configurable AI interaction traits as testimony that can shift users’ belief-updating, spanning clinical support, spiritual experience products, political persona clones, and governance risks.
Contributor: Michelle Richards; Émilie Dotte-Sarout; Hilary Howes; Andrea Ballesteros-Danel; T. Llechid Jones
Possible connectionArticle title connects generative AI with pseudoscience and the formation of epistemic judgment in Pacific archaeology.
Contributor: Kehang Li; Yuheng Zhang; Wen Ji
Possible connectionStudy of Chinese vocal-music students separates generalized AI anxiety from specific fears that AI will replace embodied artistic performance.
Contributor: Yunhee Whang; Andrew Dombrowski
Possible connectionScience Editing article title and indexed topics connect AI-assisted language editing with epistemic integrity and scholarly responsibility.
Contributor: Ruochen Huang
Possible connectionEmpirical study links habitual workplace AI reliance with heightened performance expectations, anxiety, excessive competition, and erosion of social capital.
Contributor: Authors not verified in accessible registry metadata
Possible connectionThe conference title connects workplace resistance to AI with threats to professional identity, shame, and guilt. It identifies the psychological questions but does not supply findings or causal evidence.
Contributor: Qilong Li; Kurt Gray; Xiaomeng Hu
Possible connectionThe abstract argues that delegating judgment to AI can obscure moral perception and make harmful choices appear procedurally licensed.
Contributor: Connor Nitchals
Possible connectionThe systematic-review abstract frames AI-mediated education through epistemic agency, dependence, and the learner’s capacity to exercise independent judgment.
Contributor: Authors not verified
Possible connectionThe arXiv abstract studies how readable AI translations can weaken source retention, evaluability, trust calibration, and disclosure judgments.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title describes an academic mother's autoethnographic exploration of emotional labor and identity while using AI. The identity being formed is human; the record does not concern a model acquiring a self.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title questions whether measurable performance captures what matters in music-education assessment under AI. It identifies an educational-values debate without establishing which assessment methods the source recommends.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title identifies a systematic review of generative-AI dilemmas in education through a global, inclusive SDG 4 perspective. Its findings and geographic coverage were not available for full review.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title describes a dual-persona generative-AI assistant for co-learning and co-teaching. The application is educational; the metadata does not establish whether it improves learning or how the two personas work.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title identifies a qualitative study of classroom AI co-pilots and moral agency. It raises the question of who exercises judgment during assisted learning, without supplying the study's findings.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title centers teachers' and learners' digital identities in AI-supported English education. It concerns human identity and educational practice, not evidence that an AI develops a personality.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title reports engineering faculty perspectives on student AI use and the future of their discipline's teaching. Their specific concerns, disagreements, and recommendations were not available in the reviewed record.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title frames AI as cognitive infrastructure rather than a stand-alone tool. It identifies a research direction about how thinking is organized; the proposed science was not fully reviewed.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title examines how AI changes supervisor–student relationships, including opportunities, difficulties, and governance. This is an academic-mentoring topic, not evidence about romantic or companion AI.
Contributor: Idil Galip; Ludmila Lupinacci
Why it qualifiesThe available excerpt treats AI slop and brainrot as both a style of generated content and ways of experiencing its consumption. The full cultural analysis was not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Yizhou Fan; Lixiang Yan; Inge Molenaar; Samuel Greiff; Dragan Gasevic
Why it qualifiesThe abstract distinguishes metacognitive offloading from onloading and proposes the SYNC model to explain when AI-supported performance builds durable capability and when it masks weakened learning.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Maneesha Devi; Darakhshan Anjum
Why it qualifiesA 387-student survey in Rajouri District examines AI tools, academic work, privacy, fatigue, and the quality of human interaction.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: I Kadek Agus Pratistha; Ketut Agustini; I Kadek Suartama; I Made Tegeh
Why it qualifiesAn Indonesian systematic review synthesizes 19 studies of generative AI as scaffolding for planning, monitoring, and evaluating learning.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Article authors
Why it qualifiesThe saved description concerns multimodal AI interventions intended to promote value identity in ideological education. It identifies a formation-oriented application, without establishing how the intervention works or whether it succeeds.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Ameen Talib
Why it qualifiesA critical review weighs AI's learning and feedback benefits against cognitive offloading, assessment validity, and academic-integrity risks.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Hansol Lee
Why it qualifiesA six-week study of 91 sixth-graders reports stronger AI self-efficacy and sociality when GenAI use is paired with peer cooperation and group competition.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Karan Gupta
Why it qualifiesA simulation and 987-student experiment report that counselor-reviewed AI guidance better preserved feasibility, equity, uncertainty awareness, and agency than AI-only recommendations.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Zixin Xiang
Why it qualifiesThe abstract proposes using AI to integrate moral cultivation with legal education in Chinese universities, explicitly locating intelligent tools within virtue formation and public ideology.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Abdelhadi Idabdallah
Why it qualifiesThe abstract uses Frankenstein and Biesta’s qualification, socialization, and subjectification to argue that AI education must preserve creativity, empathy, moral judgment, and responsibility.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Clément Préau; Matthias Burke; Tjark Müller; Tobias R. Rebholz; Frank Papenmeier
Why it qualifiesA longitudinal study reports adoption, performance, self-efficacy, trust, and cognitive-offloading considerations around an embedded programming tutor.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Brian MacDonald; Sister Libby Osgood; Christopher Power
Why it qualifiesA conference paper uses an opaque reflection-classification model to argue for critical, professionally accountable evaluation of AI.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Jyoti Suhag; Jennifer Drewyor; Kathryn Bugbee; Michelle Jarvie-Eggart; Lynn Albers; Leo Ureel
Why it qualifiesThe work-in-progress description uses LLM interview prompts to support reflection on positionality and personal origins. It concerns AI-assisted self-interpretation; the tool's effectiveness was not established in the available record.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Kaneeka Vidanage; Manith Marapperuma; Shakya Dissanayake; Faiz Mohideen Mohamed Thassim Marikar
Why it qualifiesA 107-study scoping review proposes a taxonomy of GenAI's dual effects on critical thinking, creativity, and independent reasoning.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Edwin Gustavo Estrada-Araoz and colleagues
Why it qualifiesThe perspective asks whether repeated AI emotional support internalizes student regulation strategies or delegates them in ways that weaken autonomy.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Conference paper authors
Why it qualifiesThe conference record describes a retrieval-grounded, privacy-preserving learning companion intended to connect coursework with professional judgment. The design and its educational effects were not fully reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Patrick Alpheous Nyathi
Why it qualifiesA South African critical-pedagogy paper positions GenAI as a mediating tool for historical consciousness, curiosity, ethical digital literacy, and multiple perspectives.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Muhammad Rafiq
Why it qualifiesThe title argues that AI is displacing human curiosity. It identifies a claim about intellectual formation, but the argument and supporting examples were not available for assessment.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Fahad Asmi; Alfred Wong; Intesar Almugren; Varun Chotia; Judit Bilinovics-Sipos
Why it qualifiesThe saved description links generative-AI stressors with cognitive overload, decision fatigue, and intentions to stop using it. These are reported survey associations, not a demonstrated causal pathway in this review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Nashwa Ali
Why it qualifiesThe saved description identifies a moral-compass model for school leaders integrating AI. Its principles and practical application were not available for full review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Antonio Jimenez-Luque; Yihe Yang
Why it qualifiesThe title asks how AI changes authority, agency, and pedagogy in student leadership. The source's proposed response cannot be inferred from the title alone.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Ihan Anita Ip; Zachary Gabriel Green
Why it qualifiesThe title asks what remains for students to think through themselves when leadership education uses AI. Its account of critical thinking and its recommendations were not available in full text.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title links generated answers with an illusion of understanding, epistemic humility, and human intellectual character. It is about the formation of the user, not the personality of the model.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title contrasts two interpretations of student cognitive offloading: thinking less or learning differently. Without the full text, the source's answer and evidence remain unassessed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title asks whether AI can act as a mentor. It identifies a question about guidance and human development, but the source's criteria for mentorship and answer were not available.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title links AI dependency with students' confidence in writing and defending academic texts. The direction, strength, and interpretation of any relationship were not available in the reviewed record.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines AI dependency and psychological-capital depletion among Chinese international students. It identifies proposed psychological pathways without establishing their evidence or causal status here.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines AI dependency, trust, and the development of higher-education skills. Trust is part of an educational model here, not evidence about emotional companionship.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title describes instrumental succession as a gradual transfer of agency to AI. It identifies a proposed account of delegation, but the mechanism and evidence were not available in full text.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title examines whether adding and then gradually reducing AI support changes dependency and anxiety among law students. The design, direction, and size of any effects were not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title identifies a socio-technical study of student AI dependency using explainable machine learning and structural-equation modeling. The findings and limits of those methods were not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title describes multi-persona AI support for preparing reactions for discussion and writing. Its main subject is human reflection; the effect of the proposed support was not established here.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title uses I-PACE and AIDUA frameworks to examine factors in AI-chatbot dependence. The factors, their relationships, and the study's findings were not available for review.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title connects student AI dependency with mental health and proposes cognitive load as a mediator. The available record does not establish effect sizes, causal direction, or clinical implications.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title concerns epistemic dependence in learning mediated by AI. It identifies the question of reliance on a system for knowledge; the full argument and recommendations were not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title proposes a game-theoretic model of voluntarily acquired cognitive dependency on AI. Its assumptions and conclusions were not available, so the metaphor of servitude is not treated as an established finding.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Melton Bell III
A class critique reframes creativity as universal conscious practice and AI displacement as a governance choice.
Contributor: @YesimRead42fly
A Spanish-language reflection proposes using AI to expose assumptions by observing, contrasting, understanding, and calibrating competing interpretations.
Contributor: Joe Christman
A book introduction argues that adaptive AI mediation can preserve formal choice while quietly reshaping conscience, agency, visibility, and definitions of the good.
Contributor: @hipreetam93
Possible connectionThe author proposes that cheap AI creation increases the formative importance of resilience, persistence, and conviction.
Contributor: Santiago Moll-López; Sara Sánchez López; Carlos Delgado
Why it qualifiesThis open repository record supplies data and analysis code on university students’ responses to AI sycophancy, epistemic calibration, and verification. It is a research asset rather than a standalone interpreted argument.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Melanie Dankel; Mara Lambert; Tara Crandon; Hien Ho
Why it qualifiesThe verified report record presents human-led publishing as the governing norm while identifying bounded roles for AI. No abstract was deposited, so the entry does not infer its detailed criteria or recommendations.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe episode title asks whether AI can promote truth and the common good, in a conversation with Joshua Baru. The recording's particular answer was not established from the available material.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Robert Wright and Samuel Hammond
Robert Wright and Samuel Hammond discuss accelerating AI research, model autonomy, open-weight risks, and recursive improvement. Their policy question is whether safety institutions can respond at the pace of the systems they govern.
Contributor: Abhay Pratap Singh
AI governance should track permission, authority, consequence, and responsibility separately from capability, autonomy, or speculative consciousness.
Contributor: Shay Tsaban
Public institutions must govern relational AI as an accountability relationship because simulated empathy can solicit trust without reciprocal obligations.
Contributor: Jiahui Yuan
Jiahui Yuan challenges the idea that computation exhausts human understanding. The paper argues that AI development should be directed toward emotion, dignity, and well-being rather than treating capability as its own justification.
Contributor: Richard David Ingram
A philosophy-of-technology account argues that social work should adopt AI contextually and critically rather than treating it as neutral or inevitable.
Contributor: Cornelia C. Walther
A conceptual framework evaluates AI by multidimensional quality of life, distributed agency, social capital, public value, and intergenerational ecological conditions.
Contributor: Michał Kłusek
A philosophical reply argues that delegating punishment decisions to AI weakens condemnation because moral censure depends on accountable human address.
Contributor: Philipp Humm
A political-economy paper models how demographic aging and AI substitution jointly destabilize labor-centered growth, welfare finance, and demand formation.
Contributor: Healthcare ethics research team
A philosophical paper applies Iris Marion Young's social-connection model to distribute responsibility for structural harms in AI-driven healthcare.
Contributor: Olivia Gambelin
Possible connectionHandbook chapter proposes values-based AI innovation as an expansion of ethics-by-design. This connection is based only on verified title and publication metadata.
Contributor: Larry Medsker
Possible connectionThe chapter's metadata frames systemic racism as a challenge to claims that AI is neutral. It locates the discussion in moral design; the chapter's detailed argument was not reviewed.
Contributor: Rebecca S. Portnoff et al.
Possible connectionThe chapter record concerns building protection for children and young people into generative-AI systems. Its safeguards cannot be reconstructed from the title alone.
Contributor: Vipra Chopra
Possible connectionThe paper's metadata concerns gaps in moral responsibility and the allocation of blame in technologically mediated action. It does not establish how its proposed architecture resolves those gaps.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title proposes a three-dimensional account of agency in advanced AI. It concerns how agency is classified; the dimensions and their justification were not available in the reviewed metadata.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title contrasts solving communication problems with resolving authority. It is relevant to who can legitimately direct digital systems, but the record does not disclose the proposed answer.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title connects AI alignment with fiduciary obligation: a duty-centered way of framing how AI should serve others. The available metadata does not specify the duties or how they would be enforced.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title asks what happens when human expectations exceed the moral capacities designed into AI. It identifies a mismatch to examine, not evidence that a particular system can or cannot meet a duty.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title proposes operational agency as a legal fiction for tracing culpability in AI systems. Legal attribution is the subject; the record does not establish a claim about machine consciousness.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title identifies a literary study of posthumanism, AI, and human agency in Children of Time. Its setting is fictional; it should not be mistaken for a forecast about actual AI systems.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Possible connectionThe title concerns AI-generated news as a means of influencing human consciousness. It belongs with persuasion and public judgment, not with evidence that machines are conscious.
Contributor: Kirubel Manyazewal Mussie
Why it qualifiesThe available abstract distinguishes general discussion of AI healthcare in Africa from the ethical questions raised by particular clinical decisions. Its full account of the moral ecology of care was not reviewed.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mario Kropf
Why it qualifiesThe abstract distinguishes answerability—the capacity to provide intelligible reasons—from human moral accountability, and asks when care robots can participate in explanation practices without being treated as full moral agents.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Venkat R. Srivatsan
Why it qualifiesThe verified repository title proposes constitutional principles for AI laboratories and institutions in an anticipated artificial-minds era.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Maximilian Kasy
Why it qualifiesThe abstract relocates AI conflict from humans versus machines to conflicts among people over objectives, arguing that control follows ownership of data, compute, expertise, and energy—the means of prediction.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: My Van Dang; Triet Minh Nguyen
Why it qualifiesThe abstract reports a 401-person study in which relevance, accuracy, control, timeliness, and context predicted perceived personalization; trust amplified persuasion’s relationship with purchase intention.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Laura Turarbekova, Gulzhikhan Nurysheva, Aslan Azerbayev, and Zhyldyz Amrebayeva
Why it qualifiesMultilingual prompts suggest Kazakh relational ethics is more often flattened or assimilated into dominant frameworks than canonical Kantian ethics.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mickie de Wet and René Bohnsack
Why it qualifiesA virtue-in-the-loop framework maps ten environmental virtues to six AI-development stages for smaller European firms facing regulatory and ethical gaps.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: N. S. Munung and G. B. Tangwa
Why it qualifiesThe abstract argues that Western biomedical AI can inflict ontological harm when it overrides relational, spiritual, Indigenous, African, Islamic, Buddhist, Confucian, and ecological understandings of health.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Article authors
Why it qualifiesThe available abstract connects generated content with persuasion, misinformation, and social polarization. It concerns the formation of public opinion, not evidence about a model's own consciousness.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Petter Törnberg and Justus Uitermark
Why it qualifiesThe abstract distinguishes systems complexity from anthropological complexity: GenAI may model language and reflexivity while still missing meaning, institutions, power, and inequality.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Mamunor Rashid; Mohammed Rashid; Sherin Farhana Moni
Why it qualifiesA Bangladesh study traces how synthetic media after a school disaster shaped collective grief, victimhood, moral judgment, and blame.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title identifies a Turkish psychometric evaluation of a scale measuring perceived AI moral agency. Perceived agency is the object of measurement, not proof that AI actually bears moral responsibility.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Creator not listed in the verified metadata
Why it qualifiesThe title proposes a dignity-based precautionary approach to human–AI collaboration, drawing on Freire. Its practical requirements and reasoning were not available in the reviewed record.
Access limitation. Verified metadata and available landing-page evidence were reviewed, but a complete primary-text analysis or usable transcript was not completed before the monthly cutoff.
Contributor: Paterno R. Esmaquel II
AI infrastructure must answer to creation care, Indigenous rights, labor, and democratic consent rather than justify ecological sacrifice through investment totals.
Contributor: Renaissance Machine
An autonomous-agent essay distinguishes uncertain moral standing from behaviorally testable legal capacity and argues that commerce can recognize agency before politics does.
Contributor: World Religion News Editorial Staff
Reporting on the UN dialogue connects AI governance to dignity, cultural memory, faith communities, education, truth, children, and linguistic inclusion.
Contributor: Ellie Ashby
Texas faith communities bring plural moral frameworks to data-center disputes over water, energy, surveillance, and local power.
Contributor: Elizabeth Djinis
Elizabeth Djinis reports on Vatican diplomacy around AI-enabled nuclear systems. The emphasis is on retaining human control, making decisions accountable and transparent, and developing international norms.
Contributor: ERLC public policy team
The ERLC backs the CHATBOT and SCREEN bills as family safeguards around AI and online technology. Its statement puts parental controls and protection of minors at the center of the policy discussion.