Human-AI Agent Interaction as a Neuroplastic Training Environment

Eranga Bandara; Ross Gore; Asanga Gunaratna; Ravi Mukkamala; Nihal Siriwardanagea; Gihan Siriwardanagea; Sachini Rajapakse; Isurunima Kularathna; Pramoda Karunarathna; Chalani Rajapakse; Sachin Shetty; Christopher K. Rhea; Ng Wee Keong; Kasun De Zoysa; Amin Hass; Shaifali Kaushik; Wathsala Herath; Preston Samuel; Anita H. Clayton; Atmaram Yarlagadd

arXiv · 2607.12823

Human-AI Agent Interaction as a Neuroplastic Training Environment

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Interaction with AI agents has become one of the most frequent activities of everyday digital life. Whether conversing with an assistant, working with a coding copilot, or generating images, the interaction follows a common iterative loop: a request is issued, a result returned, appraised, and the request revised. We observe that this loop is a high-frequency stream of contact events -- moments at which a result meets a person and a conditioned response may fire before deliberate appraisal -- making everyday agent interaction an unrecognised neuroplastic training environment. When a result disappoints, reactive patterns of impatience, perfectionism, frustration, and self-criticism are repeatedly evoked, and under activity-dependent synaptic plasticity each uninterrupted cycle deepens the underlying pathway through long-term potentiation. Ordinary agent use may thus quietly strengthen the very patterns it provokes. We propose that the same training environment can be engaged to the opposite effect. Treating conditioned reactive patterns as physical neurone paths -- activated through a pre-cognitive feeling tone that opens a brief regulatory gap -- we develop a framework in which, at that gap, in place of the reactive re-prompt, a person performs behind-the-scenes observation: watching the neural process operate so the cascade does not complete and long-term depression weakens the path rather than potentiation strengthening it. We characterise this practice through three layers of observation and two modes of application: a user-guided mode requiring no change to existing tools, and an agent-assisted mode in which an ordinary agent is lightly configured to support observation at the gap. We illustrate the framework through generative image prompting, showing how a single frustrating session is behaviourally nearly identical whether or not it is observed, yet neurologically opposite.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Eranga Bandara, Ross Gore, Asanga Gunaratna, Ravi Mukkamala, Nihal Siriwardanagea, Gihan Siriwardanagea, Sachini Rajapakse, Isurunima Kularathna, Pramoda Karunarathna, Chalani Rajapakse, Sachin Shetty, Christopher K. Rhea, Ng Wee Keong, Kasun De Zoysa, Amin Hass, Shaifali Kaushik, Wathsala Herath, Preston Samuel, Anita H. Clayton, Atmaram Yarlagadd. 2026-07-14. Human-AI Agent Interaction as a Neuroplastic Training Environment. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.12823

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗