We propose co-creative learning as a novel paradigm where humans and AI, i.e., biological and artificial agents, mutually integrate their partial perceptual information and knowledge to construct shared external representations, a process we interpret as symbol emergence. Unlike traditional AI teaching based on unilateral knowledge transfer, this addresses the challenge of integrating information from inherently different modalities. We empirically test this framework using a human-AI interaction model based on the Metropolis-Hastings naming game (MHNG), a decentralized Bayesian inference mechanism. In an online experiment, 69 participants played a joint attention naming game (JA-NG) with one of three computer agent types (MH-based, always-accept, or always-reject) under partial observability. Results show that human-AI pairs with an MH-based agent significantly improved categorization accuracy through interaction and achieved stronger convergence toward a shared sign system. Furthermore, human acceptance behavior aligned closely with the MH-derived acceptance probability. These findings provide the first empirical evidence for co-creative learning emerging in human-AI dyads via MHNG-based interaction. This suggests a promising path toward symbiotic AI systems that learn with humans, rather than from them, by dynamically aligning perceptual experiences, opening a new venue for symbiotic AI alignment.

Human education transcends mere knowledge transfer, it relies on co-adaptation dynamics -- the mutual adjustment of teaching and learning strategies between agents. Despite its centrality, computational models of co-adaptive teacher-student interactions (T-SI) remain underdeveloped. We argue that this gap impedes Educational Science in testing and scaling contextual insights across diverse settings, and limits the potential of Machine Learning systems, which struggle to emulate and adaptively support human learning processes. To address this, we present a computational T-SI model that integrates contextual insights on human education into a testable framework. We use the model to evaluate diverse T-SI strategies in a realistic synthetic classroom setting, simulating student groups with unequal access to sensory information. Results show that strategies incorporating co-adaptation principles (e.g., bidirectional agency) outperform unilateral approaches (i.e., where only the teacher or the student is active), improving the learning outcomes for all learning types. Beyond the testing and scaling of context-dependent educational insights, our model enables hypothesis generation in controlled yet adaptable environments. This work bridges non-computational theories of human education with scalable, inclusive AI in Education systems, providing a foundation for equitable technologies that dynamically adapt to learner needs.

Learning to reason and carefully explain arguments is central to students' cognitive, mathematical, and computational thinking development. This is particularly challenging in problems under uncertainty and in Bayesian reasoning. With the new generation of large language models (LLMs) capable of reasoning using Chain-of-Thought (CoT), there is an excellent opportunity to learn with them as they explain their reasoning through a dialogue with their artificial internal voice. It is an engaging and excellent opportunity to learn Bayesian reasoning. Furthermore, given that different LLMs sometimes arrive at opposite solutions, CoT generates opportunities for deep learning by detailed comparisons of reasonings. However, unlike humans, we found that they do not autonomously explain using ecologically valid strategies like natural frequencies, whole objects, and embodied heuristics. This is unfortunate, as these strategies help humans avoid critical mistakes and have proven pedagogical value in Bayesian reasoning. In order to overcome these biases and aid understanding and learning, we included prompts that induce LLMs to use these strategies. We found that LLMs with CoT incorporate them but not consistently. They show persistent biases towards symbolic reasoning and avoidance or phobia of ecologically valid strategies.

Islands are diversity hotspots and vulnerable to environmental degradation, climate variations, land use changes and societal crises. These factors can exhibit interactive impacts on ecosystem services. The study reviewed a large number of papers on the climate change-islands-ecosystem services topic worldwide. Potential inclusion of land use changes and other drivers of impacts on ecosystem services were sequentially also recorded. The study sought to investigate the impacts of climate change, land use change, and other non-climatic driver changes on island ecosystem services. Explanatory variables examined were divided into two categories: environmental variables and methodological ones. Environmental variables include sea zone geographic location, ecosystem, ecosystem services, climate, land use, other driver variables, Methodological variables include consideration of policy interventions, uncertainty assessment, cumulative effects of climate change, synergistic effects of climate change with land use change and other anthropogenic and environmental drivers, and the diversity of variables used in the analysis. Machine learning and statistical methods were used to analyze their effects on island ecosystem services. Negative climate change impacts on ecosystem services are better quantified by land use change or other non-climatic driver variables than by climate variables. The synergy of land use together with climate changes is modulating the impact outcome and critical for a better impact assessment. Analyzed together, there is little evidence of more pronounced for a specific sea zone, ecosystem, or ecosystem service. Climate change impacts may be underestimated due to the use of a single climate variable deployed in most studies. Policy interventions exhibit low classification accuracy in quantifying impacts indicating insufficient efficacy or integration in the studies.

The surging demand for new energy vehicles is driven by the imperative to conserve energy, reduce emissions, and enhance the ecological ambiance. By conducting behavioral analysis and mining usage patterns of new energy vehicles, particular patterns can be identified. For instance, overloading the battery, operating with low battery power, and driving at excessive speeds can all detrimentally affect the battery's performance. To assess the impact of such driving behavior on the urban ecology, an environmental computational modeling method has been proposed to simulate the interaction between new energy vehicles and the environment. To extend the time series data of the vehicle's entire life cycle and the ecological environment within the model sequence data, the LSTM model with Bayesian optimizer is utilized for simulation. The analysis revealed the detrimental effects of poor driving behavior on the environment.

This paper engages in a speculative exploration of the concept of an artificial agent capable of conducting research. Initially, it examines how the act of research can be conceptually characterized, aiming to provide a starting point for discussions about what it means to create such agents. The focus then shifts to the core components of research: question formulation, hypothesis generation, and hypothesis verification. This discussion includes a consideration of the potential and challenges associated with enabling machines to autonomously perform these tasks. Subsequently, this paper briefly considers the overlapping themes and interconnections that underlie them. Finally, the paper presents preliminary thoughts on prototyping as an initial step towards uncovering the challenges involved in developing these research-capable agents.

Conspiracy theories, as a type of misinformation, are narratives that explains an event or situation in an irrational or malicious manner. While most previous work examined conspiracy theory in social media short texts, limited attention was put on such misinformation in long news documents. In this paper, we aim to identify whether a news article contains conspiracy theories. We observe that a conspiracy story can be made up by mixing uncorrelated events together, or by presenting an unusual distribution of relations between events. Achieving a contextualized understanding of events in a story is essential for detecting conspiracy theories. Thus, we propose to incorporate an event relation graph for each article, in which events are nodes, and four common types of event relations, coreference, temporal, causal, and subevent relations, are considered as edges. Then, we integrate the event relation graph into conspiracy theory identification in two ways: an event-aware language model is developed to augment the basic language model with the knowledge of events and event relations via soft labels; further, a heterogeneous graph attention network is designed to derive a graph embedding based on hard labels. Experiments on a large benchmark dataset show that our approach based on event relation graph improves both precision and recall of conspiracy theory identification, and generalizes well for new unseen media sources.

The implementation of energy communities represents a cross-disciplinary phenomenon that has the potential to support the energy transition while fostering citizens' participation throughout the energy system and their exploitation of renewables. An important role is played by online information sources in engaging people in this process and increasing their awareness of associated benefits. In this view, this work analyses online news data on energy communities to understand people's awareness and the media importance of this topic. We use the Semantic Brand Score (SBS) indicator as an innovative measure of semantic importance, combining social network analysis and text mining methods. Results show different importance trends for energy communities and other energy and society-related topics, also allowing the identification of their connections. Our approach gives evidence to information gaps and possible actions that could be taken to promote a low-carbon energy transition.

Recent work in cognitive science has uncovered a diversity of explanatory values, or dimensions along which we judge explanations as better or worse. We propose a Bayesian account of how these values fit together to guide explanation. The resulting taxonomy provides a set of predictors for which explanations people prefer and shows how core values from psychology, statistics, and the philosophy of science emerge from a common mathematical framework. In addition to operationalizing the explanatory virtues associated with, for example, scientific argument-making, this framework also enables us to reinterpret the explanatory vices that drive conspiracy theories, delusions, and extremist ideologies. Intuitively, philosophically, and as seen in laboratory experiments, explanations are judged as better or worse on the basis of many different criteria. These explanatory values appear in early childhood [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and their influence extends to some of the most sophisticated social knowledge formation processes we know [6]. We lack, however, an understanding of the origin of these values or an account of how they fit together to guide belief formation. The multiplicity of values also appears to conflict with Bayesian models of cognition, which speak solely in terms of degrees of beliefs and suggest we judge explanations as better or worse on the basis of a single quantity, the posterior likelihood (see Glossary). In this opinion, we show how to resolve these conflicts by arguing that previously-identified explanatory values capture different components of a full Bayesian calculation and, when considered together and weighed appropriately, implement Bayesian cognition. This framework shows how key explanatory values identified by laboratory experiments and philosophers of science--co-explanation, descriptiveness, precision, unification, power, and simplicity--emerge naturally from the mathematical structure of probabilistic inference, thereby reconciling them with Bayesian models of cognition [7, 8]. Second, it shows how these values combine to produce preferences for one explanation over another.