Some Simple Economics of AGI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20946v2
• Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 17:41:07 GMT
• Title: Some Simple Economics of AGI
• Abstract summary: As AI decouples cognition from biology, the marginal cost of measurable execution falls to zero.<n>The binding constraint on growth is no longer intelligence but human verification bandwidth.<n>We derive a practical playbook for individuals, companies, investors, and policymakers.
• Score: 0.6117371161379209
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: For millennia, human cognition was the primary engine of progress on Earth. As AI decouples cognition from biology, the marginal cost of measurable execution falls to zero, absorbing any labor capturable by metrics--including creative, analytical, and innovative work. The binding constraint on growth is no longer intelligence but human verification bandwidth: the capacity to validate, audit, and underwrite responsibility when execution is abundant. We model the AGI transition as the collision of two racing cost curves: an exponentially decaying Cost to Automate and a biologically bottlenecked Cost to Verify. This structural asymmetry widens a Measurability Gap between what agents can execute and what humans can afford to verify. It also drives a shift from skill-biased to measurability-biased technical change. Rents migrate to verification-grade ground truth, cryptographic provenance, and liability underwriting--the ability to insure outcomes rather than merely generate them. The current human-in-the-loop equilibrium is unstable: eroded from below as apprenticeship collapses (Missing Junior Loop) and from within as experts codify their obsolescence (Codifier's Curse). Unverified deployment becomes privately rational--a Trojan Horse externality. Unmanaged, these forces pull toward a Hollow Economy. Yet by scaling verification alongside agentic capabilities, the forces that threaten collapse become the catalyst for unbounded discovery and experimentation--an Augmented Economy. We derive a practical playbook for individuals, companies, investors, and policymakers. Today's defining challenge is not the race to deploy the most autonomous systems; it is the race to secure the foundations of their oversight. Only by scaling our bandwidth for verification alongside our capacity for execution can we ensure that the intelligence we have summoned preserves the humanity that initiated it.

Related papers

• Cheap, Fallible Cognition and the Political Economy of Expertise [0.0]
  A job is not an indivisible object, and machine cognition is not a uniform substitute for human labor.<n>This paper develops a task-based framework for analyzing generative AI as cheap, scalable, and fallible cognition.<n>It concludes that AI's labor-market destiny is neither mechanical unemployment nor automatic abundance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T23:55:35Z)
• Knowing When to Quit: Diagnosing and Training LLMs to Abort Futile Reasoning [109.33717747526583]
  Large language models generate computationally expensive yet semantically void reasoning on beyond-capability tasks.<n>We introduce textbfCaRL (textbfCapability-textbfaligned textbfReinforcement textbfL) to align behavior with capability boundaries.<n>Experiments demonstrate a substantial reduction in futile reasoning while preserving performance across task difficulties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-31T09:30:33Z)
• The Age of AI Agents Demands A New Scientific Paradigm To Sustain Trustworthy Science [0.0]
  We argue that science must evolve its verification infrastructure, as it has before with peer review.<n>We propose criteria for an adapted verification infrastructure that emphasizes observable-by-default verification, scalable results, and clear attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-18T20:38:50Z)
• Economy of Minds: Emerging Multi-Agent Intelligence with Economic Interactions [80.74432115171285]
  We study how a population of agents self-orchestrate and self-adapt into stronger collective intelligence without centralized control.<n>Inspired by Friedrich Hayek's economic theory of decentralized coordination in markets, we study this question through an agent economy in which agents compete via auctions for the right to act, exchange payments, and accumulate wealth from environmental rewards.<n>We show that, with weak agents, the economy produces emergent multi-step reasoning strategies and outperforms stronger monolithic baselines across five agentic tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T20:21:09Z)
• Demystifying the Mythos or Disrupting Bugonomics? From Zero-Day Asymmetry to Defender Remediation Throughput [6.173871881133615]
  We argue that the near-term shift is not simply more zero-days. It is a move toward broader defender remediation throughput.<n>The effect is acute in open source, where LLM-assisted discovery can increase report volume while maintainer-side validation, triage funding, and release capacity may not scale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T15:43:45Z)
• Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution [80.98492754957466]
  Core trustworthy AI objectives, such as fairness, robustness, privacy, and explainability, are hard to achieve simultaneously.<n>This paper argues that causality is necessary to understand and balance trade-offs in performance and multiple objectives of trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T14:26:28Z)
• Short-Term Gain, Long-Term Fragility: AI Labor Substitution and the Erosion of Sustainable Capability [0.0]
  This paper develops a mechanism of capability masking and capability erosion under AI labor substitution.<n> AI-generated output can create the appearance that organizational capability has been replaced, even when dependence on skilled human labor remains.<n>Evidence from AI-assisted coding shows that generated output still requires substantial human verification and remains uneven in correctness, maintainability, and security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T03:11:27Z)
• Making MLLMs Blind: Adversarial Smuggling Attacks in MLLM Content Moderation [54.38271718421492]
  Adversarial smuggling attacks exploit the Human-AI capability gap.<n>It encodes harmful content into human-readable visual formats that remain AI-unreadable.<n>We conduct a preliminary exploration of mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T11:13:16Z)
• Abundant Intelligence and Deficient Demand: A Macro-Financial Stress Test of Rapid AI Adoption [0.17626455083672685]
  We identify a distribution-and-contract mismatch: AI-generated abundance coexists with demand deficiency.<n>We derive conditions on the AI capability growth rate, diffusion speed, and reinstatement rate under which the net feedback is self-limiting versus explosive.<n>Because top-quintile earners drive 47--65% of U.S. consumption and face the highest AI exposure, the transmission into private credit and mortgage markets is disproportionate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T05:26:57Z)
• Generative AI as a Non-Convex Supply Shock: Market Bifurcation and Welfare Analysis [4.887749221165767]
  We show how the GenAI cost shock reshapes the market into exit AI, and human segments, generating a -class hollow'' output.<n>We conclude that optimal governance must be toward laissez-faire congestion management.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-18T17:00:40Z)
• Why AI Alignment Failure Is Structural: Learned Human Interaction Structures and AGI as an Endogenous Evolutionary Shock [3.32021037991318]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibiting behaviors such as deception, threats, or blackmail are often interpreted as evidence of alignment failure or emergent malign agency.<n>We argue that this interpretation rests on a conceptual error.<n>LLMs do not reason morally; they statistically internalize the record of human social interaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-13T15:53:26Z)
• Fluid Agency in AI Systems: A Case for Functional Equivalence in Copyright, Patent, and Tort [0.31061678033205636]
  Modern Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems lack human-like consciousness or culpability.<n> Fluid agency generates valuable outputs but collapses attribution.<n>This Article argues that only functional equivalence stabilizes doctrine.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-06T01:06:07Z)
• The Oversight Game: Learning to Cooperatively Balance an AI Agent's Safety and Autonomy [9.553819152637493]
  We study a minimal control interface where an agent chooses whether to act autonomously (play) or defer (ask)<n>If the agent defers, the human's choice determines the outcome, potentially leading to a corrective action or a system shutdown.<n>Our analysis focuses on cases where this game qualifies as a Markov Potential Game (MPG), a class of games where we can provide an alignment guarantee.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T17:46:49Z)
• Operationalising Extended Cognition: Formal Metrics for Corporate Knowledge and Legal Accountability [0.0]
  We argue that corporate knowledge may be redefined as a dynamic capability, measurable by the efficiency of its information-access procedures.<n>We map these quantitative metrics onto the legal standards of actual knowledge, constructive knowledge, wilful blindness, and recklessness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-17T20:03:57Z)
• Impatient Users Confuse AI Agents: High-fidelity Simulations of Human Traits for Testing Agents [58.00130492861884]
  TraitBasis is a lightweight, model-agnostic method for systematically stress testing AI agents.<n>TraitBasis learns directions in activation space corresponding to steerable user traits.<n>We observe on average a 2%-30% performance degradation on $tau$-Trait across frontier models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T05:03:57Z)
• Co-rewarding: Stable Self-supervised RL for Eliciting Reasoning in Large Language Models [56.055015597319674]
  Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is effective to improve the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs)<n>Recent self-rewarding methods investigate a label-free alternative to unlock the reasoning capabilities of LLMs.<n>We propose textitCo-rewarding, a novel self-supervised RL framework that improves training stability by seeking complementary supervision from another views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T08:09:14Z)
• Evaluating Intelligence via Trial and Error [59.80426744891971]
  We introduce Survival Game as a framework to evaluate intelligence based on the number of failed attempts in a trial-and-error process.<n>When the expectation and variance of failure counts are both finite, it signals the ability to consistently find solutions to new challenges.<n>Our results show that while AI systems achieve the Autonomous Level in simple tasks, they are still far from it in more complex tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T05:59:45Z)
• Hype, Sustainability, and the Price of the Bigger-is-Better Paradigm in AI [67.58673784790375]
  We argue that the 'bigger is better' AI paradigm is not only fragile scientifically, but comes with undesirable consequences.<n>First, it is not sustainable, as, despite efficiency improvements, its compute demands increase faster than model performance.<n>Second, it implies focusing on certain problems at the expense of others, leaving aside important applications, e.g. health, education, or the climate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-21T14:43:54Z)
• Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmark [61.43264961005614]
  We develop a benchmark of 134 Choose-Your-Own-Adventure games containing over half a million rich, diverse scenarios. We evaluate agents' tendencies to be power-seeking, cause disutility, and commit ethical violations. Our results show that agents can both act competently and morally, so concrete progress can be made in machine ethics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-06T17:59:03Z)
• When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment [96.77970239683475]
  AI systems need to be able to understand, interpret and predict human moral judgments and decisions. A central challenge for AI safety is capturing the flexibility of the human moral mind. We present a novel challenge set consisting of rule-breaking question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-04T09:04:27Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.