What do we want from machine intelligence? We envision machines that are not just tools for thought, but partners in thought: reasonable, insightful, knowledgeable, reliable, and trustworthy systems that think with us. Current artificial intelligence (AI) systems satisfy some of these criteria, some of the time. In this Perspective, we show how the science of collaborative cognition can be put to work to engineer systems that really can be called ``thought partners,'' systems built to meet our expectations and complement our limitations. We lay out several modes of collaborative thought in which humans and AI thought partners can engage and propose desiderata for human-compatible thought partnerships. Drawing on motifs from computational cognitive science, we motivate an alternative scaling path for the design of thought partners and ecosystems around their use through a Bayesian lens, whereby the partners we construct actively build and reason over models of the human and world.

Extracting time-varying latent variables from computational cognitive models is a key step in model-based neural analysis, which aims to understand the neural correlates of cognitive processes. However, existing methods only allow researchers to infer latent variables that explain subjects' behavior in a relatively small class of cognitive models. For example, a broad class of relevant cognitive models with analytically intractable likelihood is currently out of reach from standard techniques, based on Maximum a Posteriori parameter estimation. Here, we present an approach that extends neural Bayes estimation to learn a direct mapping between experimental data and the targeted latent variable space using recurrent neural networks and simulated datasets. We show that our approach achieves competitive performance in inferring latent variable sequences in both tractable and intractable models. Furthermore, the approach is generalizable across different computational models and is adaptable for both continuous and discrete latent spaces. We then demonstrate its applicability in real world datasets. Our work underscores that combining recurrent neural networks and simulation-based inference to identify latent variable sequences can enable researchers to access a wider class of cognitive models for model-based neural analyses, and thus test a broader set of theories.

Humans naturally attribute utterances of direct speech to their speaker in literary works. When attributing quotes, we process contextual information but also access mental representations of characters that we build and revise throughout the narrative. Recent methods to automatically attribute such utterances have explored simulating human logic with deterministic rules or learning new implicit rules with neural networks when processing contextual information. However, these systems inherently lack \textit{character} representations, which often leads to errors on more challenging examples of attribution: anaphoric and implicit quotes. In this work, we propose to augment a popular quotation attribution system, BookNLP, with character embeddings that encode global information of characters. To build these embeddings, we create DramaCV, a corpus of English drama plays from the 15th to 20th century focused on Character Verification (CV), a task similar to Authorship Verification (AV), that aims at analyzing fictional characters. We train a model similar to the recently proposed AV model, Universal Authorship Representation (UAR), on this dataset, showing that it outperforms concurrent methods of characters embeddings on the CV task and generalizes better to literary novels. Then, through an extensive evaluation on 22 novels, we show that combining BookNLP's contextual information with our proposed global character embeddings improves the identification of speakers for anaphoric and implicit quotes, reaching state-of-the-art performance. Code and data will be made publicly available.

Recent advancements in general-purpose AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. However, the lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. In particular, ML- and philosophy-oriented alignment research often views AI alignment as a static, unidirectional process (i.e., aiming to ensure that AI systems' objectives match humans) rather than an ongoing, mutual alignment problem [429]. This perspective largely neglects the long-term interaction and dynamic changes of alignment. To understand these gaps, we introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML), and others. We characterize, define and scope human-AI alignment. From this, we present a conceptual framework of "Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment" to organize the literature from a human-centered perspective. This framework encompasses both 1) conventional studies of aligning AI to humans that ensures AI produces the intended outcomes determined by humans, and 2) a proposed concept of aligning humans to AI, which aims to help individuals and society adjust to AI advancements both cognitively and behaviorally. Additionally, we articulate the key findings derived from literature analysis, including discussions about human values, interaction techniques, and evaluations. To pave the way for future studies, we envision three key challenges for future directions and propose examples of potential future solutions.

Communicative efficiency is a key topic in linguistics and cognitive psychology, with many studies demonstrating how the pressure to communicate with minimal effort guides the form of natural language. However, this phenomenon is rarely explored in signed languages. This paper shows how handshapes in American Sign Language (ASL) reflect these efficiency pressures and provides new evidence of communicative efficiency in the visual-gestural modality. We focus on hand configurations in native ASL signs and signs borrowed from English to compare efficiency pressures from both ASL and English usage. First, we develop new methodologies to quantify the articulatory effort needed to produce handshapes and the perceptual effort required to recognize them. Then, we analyze correlations between communicative effort and usage statistics in ASL or English. Our findings reveal that frequent ASL handshapes are easier to produce and that pressures for communicative efficiency mostly come from ASL usage, rather than from English lexical borrowing.

Moreover, the program committee comprised researchers from 12 countries across five continents. The workshop featured six keynote speakers, oral sessions, poster sessions, a panel discussion, and a networking lunch. Of the 20 submitted papers, six were selected for oral and poster presentation, and an additional nine were selected for poster presentation only. The acceptance rate was, therefore, 75%. All accepted papers are published in the open-access workshop's proceedings at https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3649/.

Previous work has shown that isolated non-canonical sentences with Object-before-Subject (OSV) order are initially harder to process than their canonical counterparts with Subject-before-Object (SOV) order. Although this difficulty diminishes with appropriate discourse context, the underlying cognitive factors responsible for alleviating processing challenges in OSV sentences remain a question. In this work, we test the hypothesis that dependency length minimization is a significant predictor of non-canonical (OSV) syntactic choices, especially when controlling for information status such as givenness and surprisal measures. We extract sentences from the Hindi-Urdu Treebank corpus (HUTB) that contain clearly-defined subjects and objects, systematically permute the preverbal constituents of those sentences, and deploy a classifier to distinguish between original corpus sentences and artificially generated alternatives. The classifier leverages various discourse-based and cognitive features, including dependency length, surprisal, and information status, to inform its predictions. Our results suggest that, although there exists a preference for minimizing dependency length in non-canonical corpus sentences amidst the generated variants, this factor does not significantly contribute in identifying corpus sentences above and beyond surprisal and givenness measures. Notably, discourse predictability emerges as the primary determinant of constituent-order preferences. These findings are further supported by human evaluations involving 44 native Hindi speakers. Overall, this work sheds light on the role of expectation adaptation in word-ordering decisions. We conclude by situating our results within the theories of discourse production and information locality.

Many aspects of human learning have been proposed as a process of constructing mental programs: from acquiring symbolic number representations to intuitive theories about the world. In parallel, there is a long-tradition of using information processing to model human cognition through Rate Distortion Theory (RDT). Yet, it is still poorly understood how to apply RDT when mental representations take the form of programs. In this work, we adapt RDT by proposing a three way trade-off among rate (description length), distortion (error), and computational costs (search budget). We use simulations on a melody task to study the implications of this trade-off, and show that constructing a shared program library across tasks provides global benefits. However, this comes at the cost of sensitivity to curricula, which is also characteristic of human learners. Finally, we use methods from partial information decomposition to generate training curricula that induce more effective libraries and better generalization.

Mobility is a central issue in the transition to a more sustainable lifestyle. The average daily distance traveled by the French population has increased considerably, from 5 km on average in the 1950s to 45 km on average in 2011 [58], as has the number of personal cars (11,860 million cars in 1970 [7] compared to 38,3 million in 2021 [15, 28]). For example in Toulouse, cars concentrate 74% of the distances traveled by the inhabitants and contribute up to 88% to GHG emissions [25]. The evolution of mobility is therefore an essential question, both for the global climate crisis and for public health: negative impact of a sedentary lifestyle [9], road accidents, air and sound pollution [44]. Indeed, 40000 deaths per year are attributable to exposure to fine particles (PM2.5) and 7000 deaths per year attributable to exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2), i.e. 7% and 1% of the total annual mortality [38]; the 2-month lockdown of spring 2020 in France saved 2300 deaths by reducing exposure to particles, and 1200 more deaths by reducing exposure to nitrogen dioxide [38].

With the rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence, there is growing concern over its potential to exacerbate existing biases and societal disparities and introduce novel ones. This issue has prompted widespread attention from academia, policymakers, industry, and civil society. While evidence suggests that integrating human perspectives can mitigate bias-related issues in AI systems, it also introduces challenges associated with cognitive biases inherent in human decision-making. Our research focuses on reviewing existing methodologies and ongoing investigations aimed at understanding annotation attributes that contribute to bias.