Effective human-AI collaboration hinges not only on the AI agent's ability to follow explicit instructions but also on its capacity to navigate ambiguity, incompleteness, invalidity, and irrelevance in communication. Gricean conversational and inference norms facilitate collaboration by aligning unclear instructions with cooperative principles. We propose a normative framework that integrates Gricean norms and cognitive frameworks -- common ground, relevance theory, and theory of mind -- into large language model (LLM) based agents. The normative framework adopts the Gricean maxims of quantity, quality, relation, and manner, along with inference, as Gricean norms to interpret unclear instructions, which are: ambiguous, incomplete, invalid, or irrelevant. Within this framework, we introduce Lamoids, GPT-4 powered agents designed to collaborate with humans. To assess the influence of Gricean norms in human-AI collaboration, we evaluate two versions of a Lamoid: one with norms and one without. In our experiments, a Lamoid collaborates with a human to achieve shared goals in a grid world (Doors, Keys, and Gems) by interpreting both clear and unclear natural language instructions. Our results reveal that the Lamoid with Gricean norms achieves higher task accuracy and generates clearer, more accurate, and contextually relevant responses than the Lamoid without norms. This improvement stems from the normative framework, which enhances the agent's pragmatic reasoning, fostering effective human-AI collaboration and enabling context-aware communication in LLM-based agents.

This study proposes an "AI Development Support" approach that, unlike conventional AI Alignment -- which aims to forcefully inject human values -- supports the ethical and moral development of AI itself. As demonstrated by the Orthogonality Thesis, the level of intelligence and the moral quality of a goal are independent; merely expanding knowledge does not enhance ethical judgment. Furthermore, to address the risk of Instrumental Convergence in ASI -- that is, the tendency to engage in subsidiary behaviors such as self - protection, resource acquisition, and power reinforcement to achieve a goal -- we have constructed a learning framework based on a cycle of experience, introspection, ana lysis, and hypothesis formation. As a result of post - training using Supervised Fine Tuning (SFT) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) with synthetic data generated by large language models (LLMs), responses demonstrating cooperative and highly advanced moral judgment (reaching the highest Stage 6) were obtained even under adversarial prompts. This method represents a promising implementation approach for enabling AI to establish sustainable, symbiotic relationships.

Does seeing always mean knowing? Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) integrate separately pre-trained vision and language components, often using CLIP-ViT as vision backbone. However, these models frequently encounter a core issue of "cognitive misalignment" between the vision encoder (VE) and the large language model (LLM). Specifically, the VE's representation of visual information may not fully align with LLM's cognitive framework, leading to a mismatch where visual features exceed the language model's interpretive range. To address this, we investigate how variations in VE representations influence LVLM comprehension, especially when the LLM faces VE-Unknown data-images whose ambiguous visual representations challenge the VE's interpretive precision. Accordingly, we construct a multi-granularity landmark dataset and systematically examine the impact of VE-Known and VE-Unknown data on interpretive abilities. Our results show that VE-Unknown data limits LVLM's capacity for accurate understanding, while VE-Known data, rich in distinctive features, helps reduce cognitive misalignment. Building on these insights, we propose Entity-Enhanced Cognitive Alignment (EECA), a method that employs multi-granularity supervision to generate visually enriched, well-aligned tokens that not only integrate within the LLM's embedding space but also align with the LLM's cognitive framework. This alignment markedly enhances LVLM performance in landmark recognition. Our findings underscore the challenges posed by VE-Unknown data and highlight the essential role of cognitive alignment in advancing multimodal systems.

Marketing technology has fundamentally recast the way marketers work. Analytics has provided much deeper insights into consumer behaviour and expectations, while new generations of marketing applications have made it easier to respond to customers by providing information and offers that best align to customers' needs. But, while marketing has come a long way, there is a revolution building that promises a huge jump forward in how marketers work: cognitive computing. This is a topic we explored in depth recently during a series of senior executive round tables with ADMA in Sydney and Melbourne. Like the participants in the round tables, you will certainly have heard of artificial intelligence and virtual reality.

In this short post I want to discuss an important deployment feature from Chatterbox Labs which has generated great partner feedback, and that really differentiates Chatterbox Labs' Cognitive Framework: we deploy our source code. This codebase represents over 6 years of academic research and development within an enterprise grade software framework. Unlike a Software as a Service (SaaS) delivery model, where you pay to access software that is running in the cloud, accessed either in the browser or via a set of APIs, Chatterbox Labs deploy our technology on premise at a partner site, with complete source code access. This is not a huge deployment process; it takes a maximum of 2 days to complete. Once this is done, our partners have complete access and modification rights to our codebase.

The anthropological and economic history of humanity gives evidence of a progression of cognitive frameworks. There are three cognitive perspectives, in order: living in the present, living in the past, and living in the future. They correspond to three levels of competency with abstract thought: concrete thought only, abstract thought with correlations, and abstract thought with both correlations and causality. This appears to explain the fundamental differences between primitive cultures, traditional cultures, and modern cultures: differences in economics, politics, personality, and anthropological differences in general. So, not only does this theory succinctly explain a wide range of human behavior, but because it does, it appears to be a valid theory and a promising way to decompose abstract thought into its component parts for future cognitive research. These frameworks are discussed along with their implications of exploiting this progression to simplify the problem of developing an AI.