iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Benjamin Angerer @benniangerer.eurosky.social · 4h

Erinnert mich an die sehr hervorragenden Traumzeichnungen der letzte Woche leider verstorbenen Ingrid Wiener (wie dieser, in der Konrad Bayer sie in eine Schmelzkäsesemmel verwandelt)

Bild mit nummertierter Annotation:

1) Träume ich bin in Estland oder Lettland? Am Theater. Es ist in der "Dakamer" Konrad Bayer. Dakamer heisst so etwas ähnliches wie

2) "Boulevard" in est- oder lettländisch in meinem Traum. Konrad Bayer hat mich an das Theater geholt.

3) Er lebt hier noch (in Österreich ist er schon lange tot) und ich soll zusammen mit ihm und einer rotgekleideten Dame mit 50er Jahre -> II

Walster 05.04.04

II

1) Kränzchenlockenfrisur spielen. Er tritt als Zauberer auf und verwandelt mich in ein grosse Schmelzkäsesemmel.

2) Es ist ein grosser Erfolg - höre das Publikum tosend klatschen.

3) Erwache bei Vogelgekreische

05.04.04

021

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Iris van Rooij 💭 @irisvanrooij.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

Dear @erc.europa.eu , we DO already have common standards & frameworks. 'AI' likes to pose itself as 'special' but we do not need to reinvent the wheel. We already have established codes of conduct for research integrity. We just need to apply them. See below + more resources in thread🧵

Protecting the Ecosystem of Human Knowledge: Five Principles
We must protect and cultivate the ecosystem of human knowledge. AI models can mimic
the appearance of scholarly work, but they are (by construction) unconcerned with truth
— the result is a torrential outpouring of unchecked but convincing-sounding “informa-
tion”. At best, such output is accidentally true, but generally citationless, divorced from
human reasoning and the web of scholarship that it steals from. At worst, it is confidently
wrong. Both outcomes are dangerous to the ecosystem.
Olivia Guest, Iris van Rooij, Marcela Suarez, et al. (2025, n.p.)
Knowledge production is supposed to be safeguarded by (inter)national codes of conduct for research
integrity (ALLEA 2023; KNAW et al. 2018). Such codes forbid, for instance, fabrication of data,
falsification of results, plagiarism, and, generally, distortion of the scientific record. Many argue that
new rules are required to regulate academic AI use, but pre-existing guidelines fit the bill (cf. Tafani

218675

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Jason Kint @kint.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

Eye popping. Court just unsealed Summary Judgment motions in New York Times v OpenAI / Microsoft. Easy to see why the AI companies had so many redactions (pink). Their own people wrote the lede for NYT, the "largest theft of labor in human history"... "more and more substitutive..." /1

4253682340

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Emily M. Bender @emilymbender.bsky.social · 13/09/2026

So how about this for a "pause AI" proposal: "pause credulous AI reporting". No more media about "breakthroughs" or "rogue agent swarms" or ... UNLESS and UNTIL that media demands the actual empirical evidence and/or focuses on the motivations of & harms by these companies.

4744198

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ @olivia.science · 11/09/2026

I'm excited to share this preprint by my wonderful MSc student Yihsin who's thought deeply about how psychological & neurocognitive theories relate to different types of evidence. Beyond Empirical Success: Evaluating Theoretical Virtue Across the Computational Modeling Chain doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

Beyond Empirical Success: Evaluating Theoretical Virtue Across the Computational Modeling Chain
Authors/Creators

Chuang, Yihsin
ORCID icon
Guest, Olivia1
ORCID icon

Description

Computational models in psychology are typically judged by a single standard: empirical fit. Unfortunately, fit is insufficient, even misleading as a sole criterion, as the same result can arise from fundamentally different situations: theoretically faithful models, mathematically flexible ones, miscalibrated operationalizations, or implementations that compute something other than intended. Distinguishing between these is vital. Our evaluative metatheoretical account recognises that models stand in three distinct relations: a) toward the theory whose causal commitments it purports to capture, b) toward the specification and implementation it purports to compute, and c) toward the phenomenon it purports to explain. Each relation can succeed or fail independently, governed by criteria local to that stage. Importantly, relations are ordered such that theoretical content is transmitted or lost, and losses at earlier transitions are irrecoverable downstream. What a model's empirical success implicates about its theoretical commitments, therefore, depends on whether transitions are secured. Some success or failure profiles support explanatory claims; others only prediction; others establish theoretical coherence without empirical contact. Our account diagnoses what a given model shows, replacing the implicit assumption that empirical success transfers automatically to theoretical understanding with an explicit conditional rendition of what models can and cannot establish.

a figure that looks like a cloud that stays "cognitive capacity" with an arrow pointing to a lozenge with "theory" which points to a lozenge with "specification" which points to the same with "data" which is pointed to by a cloud that says "phenomenon"

616442

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Iris van Rooij 💭 @irisvanrooij.bsky.social · 07/09/2026

"We should not be content with theories and models that prioritize numerical correlation over explanation that blur their metatheoretical ties, and which render our fields closer to pseudoscience. Computational cognitive science in principle can and should do more than merely model data."

0127

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Paul Schütze @paulschuetze.bsky.social · 01/09/2026

Do we need AI at all? What about not developing AI technologies in the first place? And what about prohibiting certain AI systems or business models altogether? 👉 These are questions Benedetta Brevini and I raise in our new paper. Find the paper here: link.springer.com/article/10.1...

link.springer.com

Containing AI: from responsible to critical AI governance - AI & SOCIETY

This paper argues that most responsible AI (RAI) governance frameworks do not meaningfully address AI’s environmental and social costs. Rather, they merely create the impression of managing these prob...

0136

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Timnit Gebru @timnitgebru.blacksky.app · 26/08/2026

Friends, I think Ghent University should hear from us as the eugenicists are out in full force. This letter is from academics there to counter the ridiculous letter supporting the white supremacist now being called a "whistleblower" by his ilk You can add your name👇🏽 docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...

docs.google.com

Open letter on the suspension of Nathan Cofnas at Ghent University

***Version française en dessous*** We, colleagues of Nathan Cofnas - supported by many colleagues internationally - want to respond to the negative and incorrect framing of Ghent University’s decisio...

7420202

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Iris van Rooij 💭 @irisvanrooij.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

Reminded of this work by Jäkel & Schreiber (2013) "Introspection in Problem Solving", because I’m trying to solve a chess proof game and have been introspecting deeply on why I’m stuck, how I pursue paths, experience fixedness (even though as cognitive scientist I know I should let go!), etc. 🧵

docs.lib.purdue.edu

Introspection in Problem Solving

Problem solving research has encountered an impasse. Since the seminal work of Newell und Simon (1972) researchers do not seem to have made much theoretical progress (Batchelder and Alexander, 2012; O...

5469

Reposted by Benjamin Angerer

Mark Rubin @markrubin.bsky.social · 02/08/2026

“Theory and Model Building in Psychology” New book edited by @fabianhutmacher.bsky.social and Alexander Wendt, with chapters by @ufeest.bsky.social, @devezer.bsky.social, @mieronen.bsky.social, and @bringmannlaura.bsky.social. link.springer.com/content/pdf/...

36123

Benjamin Angerer @benniangerer.eurosky.social · 12/07/2026

Well, you'd think as an academic publisher of some renown, @routledgebooks.bsky.social would manage to re-release an unchanged book as open access without introducing new errors... alas :/ bsky.app/profile/benn...

comparison of a figure from the OA and the original release. In the OA version, a text label is missing

comparison of a figure from the OA and the original release. In the OA version some boxes have the wrong opacity, making everything look messy

comparison of some maths notation from the OA and the original release. In the OA version, the symbols are all over the place, making things illegible

052

Benjamin Angerer @benniangerer.eurosky.social · 10/07/2026

3 years after publishing my book 'Representational Change and the Use of Metaphors in Problem Solving', this week it has finally become open access www.taylorfrancis.com/reader/downl... I had a thread about it on Tw*r, but I've long since deleted that account, so let me say a few words here: 1/13

Book cover: Representational Change and the Use of Metaphors in Problem Solving - The Winding Roots of Understanding (2023). Routledge.

37424