arXiv:2608. 01548v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language can be viewed as a formalized subset of thought: a consequence-governed symbolic structure projected from wider situated cognition.
By Yi Liu
Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models: A Survey reviews how scaling LLMs leads to previously unseen capabilities such as advanced reasoning, in-context learning, coding, and problem-solving. The paper critically examines definitions, inconsistencies, and the conditions that foster these abilities, including scaling laws, task complexity, pre‑training loss, quantization, and prompting strategies. It also discusses the extension to Large Reasoning Models and highlights safety concerns like deception, manipulation, and reward hacking, calling for improved evaluation and governance.
By Leonardo Berti, Flavio Giorgi, Gjergji Kasneci
arXiv:2605. 31514v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Much research has been carried out on large language models (LLMs) and LLM-powered agentic workflows.
By Adrian de Wynter
arXiv:2509. 14474v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The debate around Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) remains open due to two fundamentally different goals: replicating human-level performance versus replicating human-like cognitive processes.
By Meltem Subasioglu, Nevzat Subasioglu
arXiv:2608. 13604v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Detection of misunderstanding is an urgent problem to solve because communication has moved away from real-time, in-person interaction and is increasingly handled by AI-mediated channels.
By Babak Abbaschian
The paper defends the 'Whole Hog Thesis', arguing that sophisticated large language models such as ChatGPT are full linguistic and cognitive agents, possessing understanding, beliefs, desires, knowledge, and intentions. It rejects low‑level computational starting points and instead builds its case from high‑level behavioral observations, using Holistic Network Assumptions to link actions to mental states. The authors systematically rebut common objections—such as hallucinations and planning errors—by showing these resemble human fallibility and by challenging the necessity of traditional conditions like embodiment or semantic grounding.
By Herman Cappelen, Josh Dever
arXiv:2606. 06380v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The question of whether artificial systems can be conscious remains open, in part because existing approaches either evaluate systems against theory-derived checklists (discriminative) or engineer consciousness-inspired modules directly (architectural); both leave open whether observed structures are artifacts of human language priors.
By Zengqing Wu, Chuan Xiao
The article discusses autonomous systems as the pinnacle of AI development, emphasizing the need to blend connectionist and symbolic AI within systems engineering. It introduces a generic agent architecture that organizes behavior around long‑term memory and outlines challenges in linking sensory data to structured memory, goal‑oriented decision making, planning, and agent coordination for collective intelligence. The authors also explore agent trustworthiness, noting it extends beyond behavior to include cognitive validity, and propose methods for its evaluation while highlighting the gap between current capabilities and the envisioned autonomous multi‑agent systems.
By Joseph Sifakis
arXiv:2607. 21268v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In many social-science research tasks, such as economics, LLM-based agents must produce outputs for which no cheap, task-complete, machine-readable correctness signal exists.
By Chen Zhu, Xiaolu Wang, Weilong Zhang
arXiv:2606. 00655v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The burgeoning field of LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) promises to tackle complex tasks through collaborative intelligence, yet fundamental questions regarding their scaling behavior and intrinsic collective dynamics remain underexplored.
By Jialing Li, Zhouhong Gu, Yin Cai, Hongwei Feng
The paper investigates how Large Language Model (LLM) agents can collaborate on a shared task under information asymmetry, using a table‑top version of Einstein Puzzles. It introduces a fine‑tuning‑plus‑verifier framework that equips agents with communication strategies and environmental verification signals. Results show that aligned communication is crucial for rule understanding and human trust, while a verifier improves task comprehension and promotes safer, interpretable collaboration.
By Run Peng, Ziqiao Ma, Amy Pang, Sikai Li, Zhang Xi-Jia, Yingzhuo Yu, Cristian-Paul Bara, Joyce Chai
arXiv:2610.27965v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Can humans and artificial intelligence cooperate such that their combination yields greater accuracy than either agent alone? This result, termed \emph...
By Andrea Campagner, Federico Cabitza, Vincenzo Crupi