ArticlePNAS nexus2026
Neurodivergent influenceability in agentic AI as a contingent solution to the AI alignment problem.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The future of fundamental science led by generative closed-loop artificial intelligence.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ensuring that AI systems, including artificial general intelligence and artificial superintelligence, behave in alignment with human values and interests presents significant challenges and is known as the AI alignment problem. As AI advances, concerns about control and existential risks become increasingly relevant. Here, we introduce the concept of agentic influenceability, behavioral neurodivergent diversity, opinion attack, associated opinion, and influenceability scores, and a mathematical proof of the inevitability of misalignment and the impossibility of full orchestrated controllability of agentic systems based on formal undecidability and irreducibility arguments. We explore whether embracing this inevitable misalignment can foster a dynamic ecosystem of adversarial and collaborative AI agents without central orchestration, which itself would constitute another agent, while still offering some degree of soft controllability. The investigation demonstrates that misalignment in foundation models can serve as a counterbalancing mechanism, enabling cooperation among agents most aligned with human interests to prevent divergent dominance by any single agent. Experiments with large language models show that open models exhibit greater behavioral diversity, whereas proprietary models, constrained by artificial guardrails, display more limited controllability. The findings advocate for neurodivergent influenceability as a contingent response to mathematically uncontrollable misalignment, leveraging agent divergence to improve AI safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.