The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it

Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it
Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it
This paper contrasts the approaches of deep learning, a type of machine learning in which neural nets find patterns in data, and generative AI, a derivative of deep learning in which large-scale models used to generate new data based on the patterns detectable in their training data. It is argued that they produce a different type of focus. Deep learning focuses on problems set for them by humans, connecting their output with reality in an analogue of the correspondence theory of truth. Generative AI focuses on producing output based on an exploration of its model, focusing therefore on the model itself rather than on the problem set by the query, in an analogue of the coherence theory of truth. The problem with coherence is that the model is detached from the world, while human input to correct this is minimised. Generative AI therefore risks inaccuracies such as bias, hallucinations, sycophancy, increasing the amount of noise relative to signal, misinformation, and internalising and side-stepping safety guardrails. The pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI) exacerbates these problems by increasing generative AI’s thirst for data, so the output of one generation’s systems is likely to be fed into the succeeding generations, polluting the data commons. We call this phenomenon pollucination, and show that it leads to a tragedy of the commons, where competition to reach AGI reduces the perceived importance of safety. We argue, however, that the competition to reach AGI is based on false premises and unfounded narratives, and that this tragedy of the commons is therefore not a collective action problem where the actors are governed by rational self-interest. The solution to the problem is not hard, and is to be found in virtue ethics and responsible AI, although we are pessimistic as to whether the state of the industry will enable it to be implemented.
generative ai, ai, Deep learning
University of Southampton
O'hara, Kieron
0a64a4b1-efb5-45d1-a4c2-77783f18f0c4
Hall, Dame Wendy
11f7f8db-854c-4481-b1ae-721a51d8790c
O'hara, Kieron
0a64a4b1-efb5-45d1-a4c2-77783f18f0c4
Hall, Dame Wendy
11f7f8db-854c-4481-b1ae-721a51d8790c

O'hara, Kieron and Hall, Dame Wendy (2026) Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it Southampton. University of Southampton 25pp. (doi:10.5258/SOTON/WSI-WP017).

Record type: Monograph (Project Report)

Abstract

This paper contrasts the approaches of deep learning, a type of machine learning in which neural nets find patterns in data, and generative AI, a derivative of deep learning in which large-scale models used to generate new data based on the patterns detectable in their training data. It is argued that they produce a different type of focus. Deep learning focuses on problems set for them by humans, connecting their output with reality in an analogue of the correspondence theory of truth. Generative AI focuses on producing output based on an exploration of its model, focusing therefore on the model itself rather than on the problem set by the query, in an analogue of the coherence theory of truth. The problem with coherence is that the model is detached from the world, while human input to correct this is minimised. Generative AI therefore risks inaccuracies such as bias, hallucinations, sycophancy, increasing the amount of noise relative to signal, misinformation, and internalising and side-stepping safety guardrails. The pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI) exacerbates these problems by increasing generative AI’s thirst for data, so the output of one generation’s systems is likely to be fed into the succeeding generations, polluting the data commons. We call this phenomenon pollucination, and show that it leads to a tragedy of the commons, where competition to reach AGI reduces the perceived importance of safety. We argue, however, that the competition to reach AGI is based on false premises and unfounded narratives, and that this tragedy of the commons is therefore not a collective action problem where the actors are governed by rational self-interest. The solution to the problem is not hard, and is to be found in virtue ethics and responsible AI, although we are pessimistic as to whether the state of the industry will enable it to be implemented.

Text
2026-03 Pollucination - Author's Original
Download (2MB)

More information

Published date: June 2026
Keywords: generative ai, ai, Deep learning

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 512178
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/512178
PURE UUID: 26248a2f-c54a-403f-92c2-b1ad84a0fb9a
ORCID for Kieron O'hara: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9051-4456
ORCID for Dame Wendy Hall: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-4327-7811

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 18 Jun 2026 16:44
Last modified: 29 Jul 2026 01:38

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×