A Mentalistic Interface for Probing Folk-Psychological Attribution to Non-Humanoid Robots
This paper presents an experimental platform for studying intentional-state attribution toward a non-humanoid robot. The system combines a simulated robot, realistic task environments, and large language model-based explanatory layers that can express the same behavior in mentalistic, teleological, or mechanistic terms. By holding behavior constant while varying the explanatory frame, the platform provides a controlled way to investigate how language and framing shape the adoption of the intentional stance in robotics.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Deflating Deflationism: A Critical Perspective on Debunking Arguments Against LLM Mentality
Many people feel compelled to interpret, describe, and respond to Large Language Models (LLMs) as if they possess inner mental lives similar to our own. Responses to this phenomenon have varied. Inflationists hold that a…
Diagnosing AI Explanation Methods with Folk Concepts of Behavior
We investigate a formalism for the conditions of a successful explanation of AI. We consider "success" to depend not only on what information the explanation contains, but also on what information the human explainee und…
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Uncertainty promotes neuroreductionism: A behavioral online study on folk psychological causal inference from neuroimaging data
Introduction. Increased efforts in neuroscience try to understand mental disorders as brain disorders. In the present study we investigate how common a neuroreductionist inclination is among highly educated people. In pa…
AttributeCausal InferenceTowards a WordNet based Classification of Actors in Folktales
In the context of a student software project we are investigating the use of WordNet for improving the automatic detection and classification of actors (or characters) mentioned in folktales. Our starting point is the bo…
ClassificationTranslationModeling the Ellsberg Paradox by Argument Strength
We present a formal measure of argument strength, which combines the ideas that conclusions of strong arguments are (i) highly probable and (ii) their uncertainty is relatively precise. Likewise, arguments are weak when …