arXiv:2603.03414v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We propose that the jagged intelligence landscape of modern AI systems arises from a missing training signal that we call "cognitive dark matter" (CDM): brain functions that meaningfully shape behavior yet are hard to infer from behavior alone. We identify key CDM domains-metacognition, cognitive flexibility, episodic memory, lifelong learning, abductive reasoning, social and common-sense reasoning, and emotional intelligence-and present evidence that current AI benchmarks and large-scale neuroscience datasets are both heavily skewed toward already-mastered capabilities, with CDM-loaded functions largely unmeasured. We then outline a research program centered on three complementary data types designed to surface CDM for model training: (i) latent variables from large-scale cognitive models, (ii) process-tracing data such as eye-tracking and think-aloud protocols, and (iii) paired neural-behavioral data. These data will enable AI training on cognitive process rather than behavioral outcome alone, producing models with more general, less jagged intelligence. As a dual benefit, the same data will advance our understanding of human intelligence itself.

arXiv:2602.14270v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: People increasingly use large language models (LLMs) to explore ideas, gather information, and make sense of the world. In these interactions, they encounter agents that are overly agreeable. We argue that this sycophancy poses a unique epistemic risk to how individuals come to see the world: unlike hallucinations that introduce falsehoods, sycophancy distorts reality by returning responses that are biased to reinforce existing beliefs. We provide a rational analysis of this phenomenon, showing that when a Bayesian agent is provided with data that are sampled based on a current hypothesis the agent becomes increasingly confident about that hypothesis but does not make any progress towards the truth. We test this prediction using a modified Wason 2-4-6 rule discovery task where participants (N=557) interacted with AI agents providing different types of feedback. Unmodified LLM behavior suppressed discovery and inflated confidence comparably to explicitly sycophantic prompting. By contrast, unbiased sampling from the true distribution yielded discovery rates five times higher. These results reveal how sycophantic AI distorts belief, manufacturing certainty where there should be doubt.