AI替代削弱文化多样性,互补使用更利于长期创新。
Group Selection as a Safeguard Against AI Substitution
- 区分AI互补与替代两种使用模式,分析其演化竞争。
- 替代型用户短期占优,但导致文化变异下降、创新停滞。
- 互补型用户保护群体多样性,适合强边界组织长期发展。
对生成式AI的依赖可能降低文化变异性与多样性,尤其在创意工作中。这种变异减少已引发模型性能问题,包括模型崩溃和幻觉。本文通过基于代理的模型与演化博弈论,研究了人工智能使用对人类文化演化的长期影响及“文化崩溃”的条件——即对AI生成内容的过度依赖削弱人类变异与创新,减缓累积性文化演化。比较了两类使用策略:互补型(寻求建议但主导产出)与替代型(输入极少,依赖AI生成大部分内容)。研究发现,在个体选择下,替代型用户虽加剧文化变异下降却占优势;而互补型用户通过维持探索所需变异,在群体边界清晰时可获文化群体选择青睐。结果揭示了AI采纳的长期群体效应,为政策与组织策略提供依据。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Reliance on generative AI can reduce cultural variance and diversity, especially in creative work. This reduction in variance has already led to problems in model performance, including model collapse and hallucination. In this paper, we examine the long-term consequences of AI use for human cultural evolution and the conditions under which widespread AI use may lead to "cultural collapse", a process in which reliance on AI-generated content reduces human variation and innovation and slows cumulative cultural evolution. Using an agent-based model and evolutionary game theory, we compare two types of AI use: complement and substitute. AI-complement users seek suggestions and guidance while remaining the main producers of the final output, whereas AI-substitute users provide minimal input, and rely on AI to produce most of the output. We then study how these use strategies compete and spread under evolutionary dynamics. We find that AI-substitute users prevail under individual-level selection despite the stronger reduction in cultural variance. By contrast, AI-complement users can benefit their groups by maintaining the variance needed for exploration, and can therefore be favored under cultural group selection when group boundaries are strong. Overall, our findings shed light on the long-term, population-level effects of AI adoption and inform policy and organizational strategies to mitigate these risks.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。