How AI Aggregation Affects Knowledge

We study information aggregation in the networked learning model introduced by Kearns, Roth, and Ryu (SODA 2026). There is a fixed distribution over $d$ features and a common label. Agents learn in topological order on a directed acyclic graph. Each observes a subset of the features and its parents' predictions, fits a linear predictor to minimize mean squared error, and passes only its prediction forward. The global predictor is the best linear predictor using all features. Kearns, Roth, and Ryu show that the output agent's error approaches the global predictor's error along sufficiently deep paths with suitable feature coverage, while insufficient depth can prevent aggregation even in large networks. In contrast to their main focus on a given graph and feature allocation, we consider the limits of the model under two settings. In the adaptive designer setting, a designer chooses the graph, feature allocation, and output agent knowing the distribution. In the oblivious designer setting, the designer fixes all three before an adversary chooses the distribution. Each agent observes one feature and receives predictions from a limited number of parents. We call the aggregation exact when the output agent matches the global predictor exactly. For $d\ge3$, we show that no finite depth guarantees exact aggregation for every distribution with one parent per agent, even when the designer knows the distribution. In contrast, two parents per agent suffice for exact aggregation even in the oblivious designer setting. A fixed graph, feature allocation, and output agent achieve this for every distribution at depth $O(d\log d)$. Knowing the distribution reduces the depth to $O(d)$. Both constructions use $O(d^2)$ agents, with a very large constant for two parents. We show the bounds on the depth and number of agents are all optimal up to constant factors.

Learning theories have historically changed when the conditions of learning evolved. Generative and agentic AI create a new condition by allowing learners to delegate explanation, writing, problem solving, and other cognitive work to systems that can generate, recommend, and sometimes act on the learner's behalf. This creates a fundamental challenge for learning theory: successful performance can no longer be assumed to indicate learning. Learners may complete tasks effectively with AI support while developing less understanding, weaker judgment, and limited transferable capability. We argue that this problem is not fully captured by existing learning theories. Behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism remain important, but they do not directly explain when AI-assisted performance becomes durable human capability. We propose Agentivism, a learning theory for human-AI interaction. Agentivism defines learning as durable growth in human capability through selective delegation to AI, epistemic monitoring and verification of AI contributions, reconstructive internalization of AI-assisted outputs, and transfer under reduced support. The importance of Agentivism lies in explaining how learning remains possible when intelligent delegation is easy and human-AI interaction is becoming a persistent and expanding part of human learning.

In social learning, agents learn not only from direct evidence but also through interactions with their peers. We investigate the role of imprecision in such interactions and ask whether it can improve the effectiveness of the collective learning process. To that end we propose a model of social learning where beliefs are equivalent to formulas in a propositional language, and where agents learn from each other by combining their beliefs according to a fusion operator. The latter is parametrised so as to allow for different levels of imprecision, where a more imprecise fusion operator tends to generates a more imprecise fused belief when the two combined beliefs differ. In this context we describe both difference equation models and agent-based simulations of social learning under a variety of conditions and with different initial biases. The results presented suggest that for populations with a strong initial bias towards incorrect beliefs some level of imprecision in fusion can improve learning accuracy across a range of learning conditions. Furthermore, such benefits of imprecision are consistent with a stability analysis of the fixed points of the proposed difference equation models.