This work introduces model-generated consciousness attribution as an object of empirical operationalization and diagnosis, defining an attribution rule as the recurring relationship between features of a target and an evaluator’s ratings, without implying subjective belief, intention, or experience.
Abstract
Research on AI consciousness has largely focused on whether AI systems are conscious and how humans attribute consciousness to them. Yet large language models (LLMs) increasingly function as consciousness attributors, generating judgments about whether and to what degree other entities are conscious. We introduce model-generated consciousness attribution as an object of empirical operationalization and diagnosis, defining an attribution rule as the recurring relationship between features of a target and an evaluator’s ratings, without implying subjective belief, intention, or experience. An illustrative probe compared the attribution patterns of nine contemporary models with a human reference. Nearly all model runs occupied the same region of the human-derived measurement space, characterized by comparatively strong, positive weighting of metacognitive self-reflection. The models also produced broadly similar rankings of fictional AI characters from movies, while differing in their overall rating levels. We propose a diagnostic agenda organized around three questions: how model attribution is oriented relative to human references, how attribution rules vary across models, and how observed patterns depend on the cue sets, targets, and task formats through which they are measured. As LLM-generated judgments circulate through public, professional, and academic settings, diagnosing these attribution rules can help characterize how AI systems participate in shaping interpretations of AI consciousness. This remains distinct from the ontological question of whether the systems themselves are conscious.
This article develops “pseudo-consciousness” as an analytical category for advanced artificial intelligence systems whose organized performance of consciousness-associated functions reshapes how they are interpreted, trusted, and governed without thereby justifying a positive attribution of phenomenal subjectivity. The...
José Augusto de Lima Prestes· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
A unified framework connecting empirical hallmarks of consciousness attribution to a structured risk taxonomy of Seemingly Conscious AI (SCAI), AI systems that exhibit hallmarks which elicit consciousness attribution from users is provided.
Ben Bariach, P. Schoenegger, M. Bhaskar et al.· AI and Ethics· 3 citations
It is found that AI is no lointelligenceew technology but active overwriting of the cognitive and psychocultural context in which people encounter new data modalities through new "intelligences".
G. R. N. Gunarathne· International Journal of Lat...· 0 citations
If AI is to support human cognitive growth, design must move beyond answer provision and efficiency maximization toward the organization of productive human-AI relations: relations that challenge users’ initial assumptions while providing support appropriate to the task and the user's level of expertise.
Xiaokun Wu, Min Chen, Giancarlo Fortino· Big Data and Cognitive Compu...· 0 citations
This article asks under what conditions artificial intelligence could warrant a rational attribution of consciousness. Linguistic ability, multimodality, memory, planning, action control, and humanoid embodiment are not sufficient evidence of phenomenal experience. Biological precursors such as excitability, homeostasi...
A unified vision is offered: intelligence arises from constrained architectures and emergent patterns, and as AI systems become more autonomous, they may require surrogate forms of consciousness to handle complex, real-world challenges—though these will never fully replicate the biological original.
John-Michael M. Kuczynski· Communication & Cognitio...· 0 citations
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 8, 2026