Cognitive Amplification vs Cognitive Delegation in Human-AI Systems: A Metric Framework
Eduardo Di Santi

TL;DR
This paper proposes a metric framework to distinguish between cognitive amplification and delegation in human-AI systems, aiming to evaluate both immediate performance and long-term human capability preservation.
Contribution
It introduces four operational metrics and validates the framework through agent-based simulations, providing a tool to assess cognitive sustainability in human-AI interactions.
Findings
No regime achieves genuine amplification in tested configurations.
Reducing atrophy improves human capability retention and collaboration.
Even zero atrophy does not produce positive collaborative gain.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence is increasingly embedded in human decision making. In some cases, it enhances human reasoning. In others, it fosters excessive cognitive dependence. This paper introduces a conceptual and mathematical framework to distinguish cognitive amplification, where AI improves hybrid human AI performance while preserving human expertise, from cognitive delegation, where reasoning is progressively outsourced to the AI system, risking long term atrophy of human capabilities. We define four operational metrics: the Cognitive Amplification Index, or CAI star, which measures collaborative gain beyond the best standalone agent; the Dependency Ratio, or D, and Human Reliance Index, or HRI, which quantify the structural dominance of the AI within the hybrid output; and the Human Cognitive Drift Rate, or HCDR, which captures the temporal erosion or maintenance of autonomous…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
