Markdown version: https://ai.hiina.space/reports/ai-memory-palaces-and-superdidactic-ai/09-sources.md · index
Index of everything on this site: https://ai.hiina.space/index.md
AI memory
palaces and superdidactic AI: 9. Sources
9. Sources
Every claim links to the page it came from, inline. Pages were read
through a summarizing fetch tool and two verification passes re-checked
load-bearing claims. Where a primary paper couldn't be opened (several
Nature, NEJM, Cell and PMC pages blocked automated reads), the figure
comes from an abstract, press release or review, and the link says
which. The weakest-sourced figures are Neuralink's (company claims
relayed by secondary sites) and the Shattuck 34% intent figure
(Wikipedia plus an unofficial mirror).
- Method
of loci meta-analysis (2025), Masaryk University record
- Twomey
& Kroneisen 2021, method of loci meta-analysis
- Dresler
et al. 2017, memorization training (Stanford Medicine news)
- Krokos,
Plaisant & Varshney 2019, virtual memory palaces
- Legge
et al. 2012, virtual vs imagined method of loci
- SMART:
AI-enhanced mnemonic learning (UMIACS news)
- AI-suggested
loci associations pilot (J-STAGE)
- Critique of MemPalace
agent memory (arXiv 2604.21284)
- Smith et
al. 2014, environmental context-dependent memory
- Smith & Vela
2001, context-dependent memory meta-analysis (abstract)
- Imagined context
reinstatement thesis (Wilfrid Laurier University)
- Köhnken
et al. 1999, the cognitive interview: a meta-analysis
- McDonagh
& Storer 2005, mood boards as a design catalyst
- Teasley
et al. 2000, war rooms and collocated teams
- Mark,
González & Harris 2005, no task left behind (CHI)
- Trafton
et al. 2003, preparing to resume an interrupted task
- Leroy
& Glomb ready-to-resume plan (Futurity summary)
- Parnin
& DeLine 2010, evaluating cues for resuming interrupted programming
tasks
- Ghibellini
& Meier 2025, Zeigarnik effect meta-analysis
- Starmer et
al. 2014, I-PASS handoffs (Harvard Medical School news)
- Mercado
et al. 2016, agent transparency in human-agent teaming
- Intent
(military), Wikipedia
- Wheeler
& Gabbert 2017, self-generated cues and memory
- Kaasa,
Morris & Loftus 2011, memory for past intentions (BPS Research
Digest)
- Buckingham
Shum et al., design rationale capture
- von
Hippel 2024, two-sigma tutoring revisited (Education Next)
- Kraft,
Schueler & Falken 2026, tutoring meta-analysis of 263 RCTs
- Kestin
et al. 2025, AI tutoring in Harvard physics
- Re-analysis
of the Harvard AI tutoring study (Clay Ford)
- De
Simone et al. 2025, GPT-4 after-school tutoring in Nigeria (World
Bank)
- Oreopoulos & Low
2026, Khanmigo cluster RCT (NBER w35620)
- World
Bank 2026, can ed-tech close learning gaps?
- Bastani
et al. 2025, generative AI can harm learning (PNAS)
- IDA D-5358,
DARPA Digital Tutor evaluation
- Retraction
of the Wang & Fan ChatGPT meta-analysis (Plagiarism Today)
- Hackenburg et
al. 2025, the levers of political persuasion with AI (Science)
- Costello,
Pennycook & Rand, AI dialogues reduce conspiracy belief (Nieman
Lab)
- Landauer
1986, how much do people remember?
- Macnamara
et al. 2014, deliberate practice meta-analysis (APS)
- open-spaced-repetition
srs-benchmark (GitHub)
- KAR3L, content-aware
flashcard scheduling (arXiv 2402.12291)
- LECTOR (arXiv
2508.03275)
- LLM-generated
medical flashcards pipeline (medRxiv)
- Andy
Matuschak, notes on LLM-generated prompts
- Butowska-Buczynska et
al. 2024, varied retrieval cues (PNAS)
- Rowland
2014, testing effect meta-analysis
- Cepeda et al.
2008, spacing effects in learning
- Krasne et
al. 2013, perceptual learning modules in histopathology
- Koroma
et al. 2022, learning during sleep
- Züst
et al. 2019, learning new vocabulary during deep sleep (University of
Bern)
- Hu
et al. 2020, targeted memory reactivation meta-analysis
- Carbone
& Diekelmann 2024, TMR durability (npj Science of Learning)
- Humiston
& Wamsley 2019, failed replication of implicit-bias TMR
- Harlow
et al. 2023, closed-loop auditory stimulation meta-analysis
- Henin et
al. 2019, closed-loop stimulation and memory (eNeuro)
- Elemind
neuromodulation headband (IEEE Spectrum)
- Göldi
& Rasch 2019, home TMR
- Greenwald
et al. 1991, subliminal self-help audiotapes
- Subliminal
priming replications (Meta-Psychology)
- Targeted
dream incubation and creativity (MIT News)
- Konkoly
et al. 2021, two-way communication with lucid dreamers
- Predicting
memory responders to sleep stimulation (medRxiv 2025 preprint)
- Sheeran,
Listroma & Gollwitzer 2025, implementation intentions
meta-analysis
- Maier et
al. 2022, no evidence for nudging after bias adjustment (PNAS)
- DellaVigna & Linos
2022, RCTs to scale: nudge units (NBER w27594)
- Milkman
et al. 2021, gym megastudy (Nature)
- Milkman
et al. 2022, 680,000-person vaccination nudge megastudy
- Klasnja
et al. 2019, HeartSteps micro-randomized trial (Europe PMC)
- Chatbot
physical activity coaching meta-analysis, 12 RCTs
- Giné,
Karlan & Zinman, commitment contracts for smoking cessation
- LLM-personalized energy
feedback field trial (arXiv 2604.03881)
- Jörke
et al. 2025, GPTCoach
- Mishra et al. 2021,
detecting receptivity for mHealth interventions
- Künzler
et al. 2019, receptivity to just-in-time interventions
- Yancey
& Settles 2020, recovering bandit for Duolingo notifications
(KDD)
- Chiu
& Gilbert 2023, reminder setting and strategic offloading
- Wood
& Rünger 2016, psychology of habit
- Oralytics
reinforcement learning design (arXiv 2406.13127)
- GameNGen, diffusion
models as game engines (arXiv 2408.14837)
- Genie
3 (Google DeepMind)
- NeuralOS (arXiv
2507.08800)
- Generative
UI (Google Research)
- Gajos
et al. 2008, SUPPLE++ improving performance for motor-impaired
users
- Findlater
et al. 2009, adaptive interfaces and motor memory
- Willett
et al. 2023, high-performance speech neuroprosthesis (Nature)
- Metzger
et al. 2023, brain implants restore communication (Physics
World)
- Card
et al. 2024, accurate and rapidly calibrating speech
neuroprosthesis
- Neuralink
cursor record (Decrypt)
- Meta
sEMG wristband (The Register)
- Brain2Qwerty non-invasive
typing decoding (arXiv 2502.17480)
- Flesher et al.
2021, tactile microstimulation in a BCI
- Fernández
et al. 2021, visual percepts from an intracortical microelectrode
array
- Zheng & Meister, the
unbearable slowness of being (arXiv 2408.10234)
- State of Brain
Emulation Report 2025 (arXiv 2510.15745v3)
- FlyWire
whole fly brain connectome (Earth.com)
- Shiu et al. 2024, fly
connectome model (UC Berkeley)
- MICrONS
mouse visual cortex map (NIH)
- State of Brain
Emulation Report 2025, v2 PDF
- E11 Bio roadmap
- Dawes
1979, the robust beauty of improper linear models
- Park et al. 2024,
generative agent simulations of 1,000 people (arXiv 2411.10109)
- Twin-2K-500 (arXiv
2505.17479)
- Maia individual chess
models (arXiv 2008.10086)
- Chalmers 1995, absent
qualia, fading qualia, dancing qualia
- Personal
identity, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Review
of Susan Schneider, Artificial You (The Philosophers' Magazine)
- The
Chinese Room Argument, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Seth
2025, conscious AI and biological naturalism
- Koch
on what it will take for computers to be conscious (MIT Technology
Review)
- Robin Hanson, The
Age of Em
Text licensed CC BY 4.0 (attribution: Hiina, ai.hiina.space). Source:
https://github.com/hiinaspace/ai-hiina-space