arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2503.15508

Assessing Human Intelligence Augmentation Strategies Using Brain Machine Interfaces and Brain Organoids in the Era of AI Advancement

Kenta Kitamura
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies, including the potential emergence of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Artificial Superintelligence (ASI), has raised concerns about AI surpassing human cognitive capabilities. To address this challenge, intelligence augmentation approaches, such as Brain Machine Interfaces (BMI) and Brain Organoid (BO) integration have been proposed. In this study, we compare three intelligence augmentation strategies, namely BMI, BO, and a hybrid approach combining both. These strategies are evaluated from three key perspectives that influence user decisions in selecting an augmentation method: information processing capacity, identity risk, and consent authenticity risk. First, we model these strategies and assess them across the three perspectives. The results reveal that while BO poses identity risks and BMI has limitations in consent authenticity capacity, the hybrid approach mitigates these weaknesses by striking a balance between the two. Second, we investigate how users might choose among these intelligence augmentation strategies in the context of evolving AI capabilities over time. As the result, we find that BMI augmentation alone is insufficient to compete with advanced AI, and while BO augmentation offers scalability, BO increases identity risks as the scale grows. Moreover, the hybrid approach provides a balanced solution by adapting to AI advancements. This study provides a novel framework for human capability augmentation in the era of advancing AI and serves as a guideline for adapting to AI development.

Explore related subjects

cs.HCcs.CRcs.ET

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kenta Kitamura. 2025-01-27. Assessing Human Intelligence Augmentation Strategies Using Brain Machine Interfaces and Brain Organoids in the Era of AI Advancement. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.15508

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Learning Password Best Practices Through In-Task Instruction

Users often make security- and privacy-relevant decisions without a clear understanding of the rules that govern safe behavior. We introduce pedagogical friction, a design approach that inserts brief, instructional interactions at the moment of action. We evaluate this approach in the context of password creation, a familiar task with clear quality criteria. We conducted a randomized study with 128 participants across four interface conditions that varied the depth and interactivity of guidance. We assessed three outcomes: (1) rule compliance in a subsequent password task without guidance, (2) accuracy on survey questions tied to password rules, and (3) behavior-knowledge alignment, which captures whether participants who correctly followed a rule also recognized it on the survey. Across the guided conditions, participants corrected most rule violations in the follow-up task and showed high behavior-knowledge alignment. Survey results suggested clearer advantages for some rule types, especially symbol related questions. These results position pedagogical friction as a lightweight intervention for security- and privacy-critical interfaces.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Leveling the Playing Field: Temporal Video Segmentation for Individuals with ADHD in Computing Education

Individuals with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) often face significant barriers in computing education. In asynchronous learning environments, instructional videos can impose high extraneous cognitive load, often relying on assumptions about sustained attention and working memory that do not align with ADHD neurocognitive profiles. In this work, we evaluate a post-hoc video processing intervention that segments instructional content into single-instruction chunks followed by fixed-length pauses to reduce cognitive load. In a within-participants controlled study with 17 individuals with ADHD and 10 without, we find that the intervention has an equalizing effect. Although it improved performance for all participants, gains were larger for those with ADHD, reducing their errors and hesitations to levels comparable to those of participants without ADHD under the same intervention. These results align with the goals of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), by showing that cognitively-aligned, post-hoc instructional video modifications can reduce performance disparities across diverse neurocognitive profiles.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Human Driver Temperament and the Safety Impact of a C-V2X Denial-of-Service Flooding Attack in Mixed-Autonomy Traffic

Cooperative and connected automated vehicles (CAVs) rely on Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) messages to cross signalized intersections; a denial-of-service (DoS) flood that blocks SPaT forces CAVs into a fail-safe mode. Because human-driven vehicles share the intersection, the safety consequence depends not only on the attack and the CAV fail-safe policy, but on how the surrounding human drivers behave. We investigate this human-factors dimension with a coupled OMNeT++/INET (5G NR-V2X) and SUMO microsimulation of a signalized corridor, sweeping CAV market penetration (10-90%), four calibrated driver temperaments (cautious to aggressive) and two standards-based fail-safe policies, a minimal-risk maneuver (MRM) and an adaptive cruise control (ACC) keep-driving fallback, with each attack arm differenced against its policy-matched no-attack baseline. Temperament's effect on the attack is specific and modest rather than a blanket amplification. Aggressive surroundings worsen one metric, the hard-braking a keep-driving fail-safe forces on nearby drivers (p = 0.03), rising from near zero to +8 episodes/1000 veh-s. They appear to dampen rear-end conflicts, but only because the flood clears the queues aggressive drivers build, so the gain is in flow, not safety. On the attack's primary signatures, CAV red-light running and crossing conflicts, temperament has no detectable effect. It instead dominates baseline risk, producing a 13- to 18-fold cautious-to-aggressive gradient far larger than the attack itself, which acts through a channel already congested by CAV adoption. Human driver populations determine how dangerous the intersection is but do not systematically amplify this attack, so fail-safe design cannot assume a cautious test population bounds the risk.

cs.HC↗