Toggle light / dark theme

Chimpanzees rationally revise their beliefs

The study, titled “,” was conducted by a large research team that included UC Berkeley Psychology Postdoctoral Researcher Emily Sanford, UC Berkeley Psychology Professor Jan Engelmann and Utrecht University Psychology Professor Hanna Schleihauf. Their findings showed that chimpanzees — like humans — can change their minds based on the strength of available evidence, a key feature of rational thought.

Working at the Ngamba Island Chimpanzee Sanctuary in Uganda, the researchers presented chimps with two boxes, one containing food. Initially, the animals received a clue suggesting which box held the reward. Later, they were given stronger evidence pointing to the other box. The chimps frequently switched their choices in response to the new clues.

“Chimpanzees were able to revise their beliefs when better evidence became available,” said Sanford, who is a researcher in the UC Berkeley Social Origins Lab. “This kind of flexible reasoning is something we often associate with 4-year-old children. It was exciting to show that chimps can do this too.”

To ensure the findings reflected genuine reasoning rather than instinct, the team incorporated tightly controlled experiments and computational modeling. These analyses ruled out simpler explanations, such as the chimps favoring the latest signal (recency bias) or reacting to the most obvious cue. The models confirmed that the chimps’ decision-making aligned with rational strategies of belief revision.

“We recorded their first choice, then their second, and compared whether they revised their beliefs,” Sanford said. “We also used computational models to test how their choices matched up with various reasoning strategies.”

The study challenges the traditional view that rationality — the ability to form and revise beliefs based on evidence — is exclusive to humans.

“The difference between humans and chimpanzees isn’t a categorical leap. It’s more like a continuum,” Sanford said.

An old fish fossil tells a new story about lamniform shark evolution

An international, multi-university research team, including scientists from Columbus State University, has unearthed a crucial new piece of the puzzle in the evolution of sharks.

A recent study published in Communications Biology, “Early gigantic lamniform marks the onset of mega-body size in modern shark evolution,” has identified a new, extinct lamniform shark—a group that includes modern-day great white and mako sharks. It marks the earliest known example of a gigantic shark, suggesting that the trend of mega-body size in modern shark evolution began much earlier than previously thought.

The team, led by Dr. Mohamad Bazzi of Stanford University, included Dr. Mike Newbrey of Columbus State’s Department of Biology and 2020 alumna Tatianna Blake. They derived their conclusions after studying specimens from the Darwin Formation that outcrops at Darwin, Australia. These specimens, collected by other researchers in the 1980s, had been stored in a museum collection and remained unstudied until recently, when the team examined them in detail.

Teen builds advanced robotic hand from LEGO parts

A talented teenager from the UK has built a four-fingered robotic hand from standard Lego parts that performs almost as well as research-grade robotic hands. The anthropomorphic device can grasp, move and hold objects with remarkable versatility and human-like adaptability.

Jared Lepora, a 16-year-old student at Bristol Grammar School, began working on the hand a couple of years ago with his father, who works at the University of Bristol. Called the Educational SoftHand-A, it is made entirely of LEGO MINDSTORMS components and is designed to mimic the shape and function of the human hand. The only non-LEGO parts are the cords that act as tendons.

The hand’s four (an index, middle, pinkie and opposing thumb) and twelve joints (three on each finger) are driven by two motors that control two sets of tendons. One tendon opens the hand while the other closes it, similar to the push-pull system of our own muscles.

The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle?

Writing is a complex phenomenon that requires diverse skills: perceiving the pen and paper, moving the writing instrument, and directing the movement through thought. Using a pen involves paying attention to motor aspects such as drawing letters legibly, controlling the pressure of the tip on the paper, following lines and spaces on the page, and coordinating thought, action, and vision. This multisensory integration underlies memory abilities. Moreover, handwriting involves a wide variety of supporting materials, including pens, pencils, or chalk on a blackboard, all of which offer different experiences and create new neural activations and skills.

Despite sharing similar central goals and processes, handwriting and typing differ significantly in terms of the tools used, spatiotemporal dimensions, motor programming, and fine motor development. Compared with handwriting, which requires more time and attention to learn, typing can be considered simpler and faster, as it enables the production of a more easily readable and homogeneous product in less time. However, focused attention and a longer processing time improve memory retention, and once automatic control of the graphic gesture is achieved, minimal cognitive effort is required. Moreover, the specific movements memorized when learning to write contribute to the visual recognition of graphic shapes and letters and secondarily also improve reading ability. Indeed, since the ability to recognize letters is widely recognized in the literature as the first phase of reading, improving it through writing may effectively influence how children read.

The comparison between handwriting and typing reveals important differences in their neural and cognitive impacts. Handwriting activates a broader network of brain regions involved in motor, sensory, and cognitive processing, contributing to deeper learning, enhanced memory retention, and more effective engagement with written material. Typing, while more efficient and automated, engages fewer neural circuits, resulting in more passive cognitive engagement. These findings suggest that despite the advantages of typing in terms of speed and convenience, handwriting remains an important tool for learning and memory retention, particularly in educational contexts.

Governor-General’s Design Challenge 2025

Are you keen to explore quantum concepts with your students? Have you been looking for ideas on how to make abstract ideas more accessible and engaging for young learners?

The 2025 Governor-General’s Design Challenge celebrates the Year of Quantum Science and Technology by supporting you to turn your students into “photon detectives” in the classroom.

This hands-on STEM experience for students in Years 5–10 sets out a challenge for your class to complete, with the challenge introduced in a special video co-presented by the Governor-General, Her Excellency the Honourable Sam Mostyn AC and Questacon.

Unified Equation: A Berry-Curvature Theory of Quantum Gravity, Entanglement, and Mass Emergence

Many Thanks to Sabine Hossenfelder for giving me puzzles.

What if everything — gravity, light, particles, and even the flow of time — came from a single equation? In Chavis Srichan’s Unified Theory, the universe isn’t built from matter, but from the curvature of entanglement — the twists and turns of quantum information itself. Space, energy, and even consciousness are simply different ways this curvature vibrates.

The One Equation.

At the smallest scale, every motion and interaction follows one rule:

[D_μ, D_ν]Ψ = (i/ħ) [(8πG/c⁴)⟨T_μν(Ψ)⟩ − Λ_q g_μν + λ ∇_μ∇_ν S]Ψ

It means that the “shape” of space itself bends in response to energy and information — and that same bending is quantum mechanics, gravity, and thermodynamics combined.

Mass: When Curvature Loops Back.

AGI is still a decade away

Reinforcement learning is terrible — but everything else is worse.

Karpathy’s sharpest takes yet on AGI, RL, and the future of learning.

Andrej Karpathy’s vision of AGI isn’t a bang — it’s a gradient descent through human history.

Karpathy on AGI & Superintelligence.

* AGI won’t be a sudden singularity — it will blend into centuries of steady progress (~2% GDP growth).

* Superintelligence is uncertain and likely gradual, not an instant “explosion.”

/* */