To make a GPU "imagine" or "sample," we must use pseudorandom number generators and perform massive floating-point matrix multiplications to simulate a probability distribution.

Abstract

The pursuit of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) has reached a critical inflection point in the mid-2020s. The dominant paradigm—characterized by the brute-force scaling of Transformers on deterministic digital hardware—is colliding with fundamental physical and economic asymptotes. This report presents a "Deep Truth" forensic analysis of the current trajectory, auditing the incentives, consensus, and physical limitations that define the state of the art. Through a first-principles investigation, we identify that the simplest and most efficient strategy for creating highly intelligent digital minds lies not in the further optimization of digital approximation, but in the alignment of computational substrates with the stochastic nature of reality. The convergence of Active Inference as a cognitive architecture and Thermodynamic Computing as a physical substrate offers a pathway to intelligence that is orders of magnitude more efficient than the current deep learning orthodoxy. This treatise explores the "Reformist" tracks of 1-bit quantization and the "Revolutionary" tracks of physics-based computing, synthesizing a final verdict on the optimal architecture for the instantiable digital mind.

Part I: The Stagnation of the Brute-Force Orthodoxy

1. The Scaling Law Consensus and the "Logarithmic Trap"

For the past decade, the field of Artificial Intelligence has been governed by a singular, powerful heuristic: the Scaling Laws. Popularized by research from OpenAI and DeepMind, and later formalized in the "Chinchilla" scaling laws, this consensus posits a power-law relationship between the amount of compute, the size of the dataset, the parameter count of the model, and the resulting reduction in loss (perplexity). This heuristic drove the capitalization of the AI industry, justifying trillion-dollar investments in Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) infrastructure and the construction of gigawatt-scale data centers.¹

However, a forensic audit of the research landscape from late 2024 through 2025 reveals that this consensus is fracturing. The curve, once thought to be a smooth path to superintelligence, is revealing itself to be a "Logarithmic Trap." As noted in forensic analyses of the field, the linear gains in model capability now require exponential increases in computational resources and data. This is not merely a financial hurdle; it is a physical one. The "Log" is the problem: we are running into the practical limits of riding a curve where Moore's Law—which only doubles transistor density every two years—cannot keep pace with the demand for exponential compute.²

1.1 The Saturation of Frontier Models

By December 2025, a "well-kept secret" had permeated the highest levels of the AI industry: frontier models appeared to have reached their ceiling. The scaling laws that powered the leap from GPT-3 to GPT-4 began to show diminishing returns. Inside major laboratories, the quiet consensus grew that simply adding more data and compute would not create the "all-knowing digital gods" once promised.¹ The exponential progress of Large Language Models (LLMs) showed signs of stalling, not because the models were getting worse, but because the cost of marginal improvement had exceeded the energy budget of the hardware.

This saturation is evidenced by the behavior of the leading labs. Instead of releasing substantially larger pre-trained base models in 2025, the focus shifted to "Test-Time Compute" and reasoning models (discussed in Section 2). This pivot serves as a tacit admission that pre-training scaling alone has hit a wall. The prediction by industry leaders that AGI would arrive by 2026 based solely on scaling laws is now viewed with skepticism by researchers who recognize the thermodynamic constraints.¹

1.2 The Data Wall and Model Collapse

A critical component of the scaling stagnation is the exhaustion of high-quality training data. The internet, while vast, is finite. The high-quality human text required to train coherent models—books, academic papers, high-quality code—has largely been consumed. The industry's response has been to turn to synthetic data, where models are trained on the outputs of other models. However, this introduces the risk of "model collapse," a degenerative process where the model's understanding of the tails of the distribution (rare but critical concepts) vanishes, leading to homogenized and increasingly hallucinated outputs.⁴

Forensic analysis of the incentives involved suggests a dangerous feedback loop. To justify the massive capital expenditure on GPUs, companies are incentivized to claim that synthetic data is a panacea. However, first-principles reasoning suggests that a closed loop of synthetic data generation acts as an entropy pump, increasing disorder and bias within the model unless grounded in external physical reality—something standard LLMs lack.¹

2. The Economic and Political Entrenchment of the Status Quo

To understand why the industry persists with the brute-force method despite these signals, one must audit the economic incentives. The current AI ecosystem is a "monopoly of compute," where a small number of highly capitalized firms (OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Anthropic) control the resources required to train frontier models.⁶

2.1 The "Hardware Lottery" and Sunk Cost Fallacy

The concept of the "Hardware Lottery" posits that the success of a research direction is determined not by its intellectual merit but by its compatibility with available hardware. The dominance of the Transformer architecture is largely due to its high parallelizability on GPUs. Because the industry has invested hundreds of billions of dollars in NVIDIA H100 and Blackwell architectures, there is a massive financial disincentive to explore non-GPU-friendly algorithms.⁸

This creates a "lock-in" effect. Academic and industrial researchers are shepherded into the Deep Learning paradigm because that is where the funding, the tools (PyTorch/CUDA), and the hardware are. Divergent approaches—such as neuromorphic computing or symbolic AI—are systematically underfunded, not because they lack promise, but because they do not run efficiently on the hardware that the monopolies have already bought.⁶

2.2 The Grant Bias and the "Gerontocracy" of Funding

A forensic review of research funding reveals a systemic bias against novel architectures. Federal and private grants are overwhelmingly directed toward incremental improvements of Deep Learning. "Neurosymbolic" or physics-based approaches often struggle to secure funding because they are viewed as "high risk" compared to the "sure bet" of scaling Transformers.¹⁰ This "consensus mechanism" acts as a filter, removing dissenting voices and unconventional approaches from the mainstream discourse, effectively deplatforming alternative tracks to AGI before they can mature.¹²

Table 1: The Consensus vs. The Reality

Part II: The Physics of Intelligence and the Energy Wall

To define the "simplest, yet efficient" strategy, we must abandon the benchmarks of the software industry (FLOPS, perplexity) and adopt the benchmarks of physics (Joules, Entropy).

3. The Thermodynamic Inefficiency of Deterministic Computing

The fundamental error of the current AGI trajectory is the mismatch between the nature of the problem (probabilistic inference) and the nature of the tool (deterministic switching).

3.1 The Von Neumann Bottleneck and Landauer’s Limit

Current AI runs on the Von Neumann architecture, which physically separates the processing unit from the memory unit. This creates a bottleneck where energy is wasted primarily on moving data back and forth, rather than on computation itself. Furthermore, digital logic relies on irreversible operations (erasing bits), which, according to Landauer’s Principle, dictates a minimum energy cost of $k_B T \ln 2$ per bit erased. While modern chips are far from this limit, the architectural requirement to maintain perfect signal integrity (high signal-to-noise ratio) necessitates high voltages and massive error correction overhead.¹³

3.2 The Simulation Cost of Randomness

Intelligence is inherently probabilistic. An agent does not need to know that "X follows Y"; it needs to know the probability that "X causes Y." Deep Learning models are probabilistic engines (sampling from distributions). However, GPUs are deterministic engines. To make a GPU "imagine" or "sample," we must use pseudorandom number generators and perform massive floating-point matrix multiplications to simulate a probability distribution.

This is akin to simulating the trajectory of every water molecule to understand a river's flow, rather than simply letting the water flow. We are burning gigawatts to suppress thermal noise in the transistors, only to mathematically re-introduce noise at the software layer to prevent overfitting and enable creativity. This is the definition of thermodynamic inefficiency.15

4. The "System 2" Band-Aid: Test-Time Compute

In response to the stagnation of pre-training, labs like OpenAI have introduced "reasoning" models such as o1 and o3.¹⁷ These models utilize "Test-Time Compute," effectively spending more time "thinking" before generating a response.

4.1 Mechanism: MCTS and Chain-of-Thought

The architecture of models like o1 likely involves a combination of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting and Reinforcement Learning on reasoning paths, potentially guided by Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS).¹⁹ The model generates multiple internal "thoughts," evaluates them, backtracks if necessary, and converges on a solution. This mimics human "System 2" thinking (slow, deliberate) as opposed to "System 1" (fast, intuitive).

4.2 The Efficiency Paradox of o1

While o1 achieves state-of-the-art results on reasoning benchmarks like the ARC-AGI and Math Olympiads 18, it exacerbates the energy crisis. "Test-Time Compute" means that the inference phase—which was previously cheap—now becomes computationally intensive. A single query might trigger thousands of internal inference steps.

This strategy is not "simple" or "efficient" in the first-principles sense. It is a brute-force emulation of reasoning, achieved by running a massive neural network recursively. It solves the accuracy problem for specific domains but worsens the efficiency problem.17 It is a patch, not a cure.

Part III: The Reformist Track – Optimization Within the Paradigm

Before exploring radical departures, we must audit the "Steel-Man" version of the current digital paradigm. Can digital deep learning be made efficient enough to be viable?

5. The 1-Bit Revolution: BitNet b1.58

The most significant development in digital efficiency is the emergence of 1-bit Large Language Models, specifically the BitNet b1.58 architecture.²³

5.1 The Architecture of Ternary Weights

Standard LLMs use 16-bit (FP16) or 32-bit (FP32) floating-point numbers for their weights. This requires energy-intensive Floating Point Units (FPUs) to perform matrix multiplications.

BitNet b1.58 quantizes every weight in the network to one of three values: $\{-1, 0, 1\}$.

• The "-1" and "+1": Represent negative and positive correlation.
• The "0": Represents no connection (sparsity), which is critical for filtering out noise.²⁵
• 1.58 Bits: The information content is $\log_2(3) \approx 1.58$ bits.

5.2 Physics of the 1-Bit Operation

The genius of BitNet lies in how it changes the physics of the computation. In a matrix multiplication $Y = W \cdot X$:

• If $W$ is floating point, the hardware must perform complex multiplication logic.
• If $W \in \{-1, 0, 1\}$, the multiplication vanishes. It becomes simple addition (accumulator).
• If $W = 1$, add $X$ to the accumulator.
• If $W = -1$, subtract $X$.
• If $W = 0$, do nothing.This reduces the energy consumption of matrix multiplication by over 70% and reduces memory bandwidth requirements (the true bottleneck) by nearly 4x compared to FP16.26

5.3 Implications for Instantiable Minds

BitNet proves that high-precision floating-point math is not a requirement for intelligence. The "Deep Truth" here is that intelligence is robust to quantization. BitNet b1.58 matches LLaMA-level performance on perplexity and downstream tasks.²⁴ This is the "Simplest" strategy for deployment on existing digital hardware (CPUs, Edge devices), serving as a necessary bridge to the future.

6. Non-Generative Architectures: JEPA

Yann LeCun has long argued that "Generative AI" (predicting the next pixel) is a trap. The "Joint Embedding Predictive Architecture" (JEPA) offers an alternative.²⁹

6.1 Predicting Representations, Not Pixels

Generative models waste vast capacity trying to predict stochastic details (the pattern of leaves on a tree) that are irrelevant to the concept (it is a tree). JEPA learns to predict in an abstract representation space. It ignores the noise and models the physics/semantics of the world.

• Efficiency: By abandoning pixel-level generation, JEPA reduces the computational burden of training and allows the model to learn "World Models" much faster.
• Status: While theoretically superior for "understanding," JEPA has not yet displaced the Transformer for text generation, as the "next token" objective is shockingly effective for language. However, for a "robot mind" that interacts with the physical world, JEPA is far more efficient than a generative video model.³⁰

Part IV: The Revolutionary Track – The Convergence of Physics and Logic

The forensic analysis identifies a deeper "truth" hidden in the fringe: the convergence of Active Inference (the logic of life) and Thermodynamic Computing (the physics of nature).

7. The Cognitive Architecture: Active Inference

To create a mind that is "simple" (unified principles) and "efficient" (sample efficient), we must move beyond Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Supervised Learning.

7.1 The Free Energy Principle (FEP)

Proposed by Karl Friston, the FEP posits that all self-organizing systems (from cells to brains) obey a single imperative: Minimize Variational Free Energy (VFE).³²

• Definition: VFE is a mathematical upper bound on "surprise" (entropy). To survive, an organism must stay within a limited set of states (homeostasis).
• Unification: The FEP unifies perception and action.
• Perception: Changing internal beliefs to match sensory data (minimizing prediction error).
• Action: Changing the world to match internal beliefs (active inference).
• Learning: Updating the model parameters to reduce VFE over time.

7.2 Why Active Inference is the "Simplest" Logic

In standard AI, we stitch together an LLM (for talk), an RL policy (for goals), and a Vision model (for seeing). This is complex and brittle. Active Inference uses a single objective function for everything. It handles the "exploration-exploitation" trade-off naturally (curiosity is just minimizing expected free energy).34

Unlike Deep Learning, which requires "Big Data" (petabytes), Active Inference is "sample efficient." It learns continuously from interaction, much like a child.34

7.3 Verses AI and the Path to AGI

Verses AI is the primary commercial entity pushing this track. Their "Genius" platform and "Renormalizing Generative Models" (RGMs) aim to implement scalable Active Inference.³⁷

• Claim: They project AGI (or high-level agency) by January 2026.³⁸
• Red Team Audit: Critics argue that while the theory is sound, the implementation is computationally expensive on digital hardware (calculating marginal probabilities is hard). Furthermore, Verses has faced skepticism for "vaporware" tendencies, though their recent benchmarks on the "Genius" platform show promise against RL baselines in specific tasks.³⁷

8. The Physical Substrate: Thermodynamic Computing

The ultimate efficiency gain comes from matching the hardware to the math.

8.1 Extropic AI and the TSU

Extropic AI is building the Thermodynamic Sampling Unit (TSU). This hardware treats thermal noise not as a bug, but as a feature.¹³

• Brownian Motion as Compute: In a TSU, the electrons are allowed to fluctuate thermally. The chip is programmed by setting "energy barriers" that define a probability landscape. The system naturally "relaxes" into the low-energy states.
• The Physics-Math Bridge: This physical relaxation is mathematically identical to running a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling algorithm, which is the core bottleneck of Bayesian AI.
• The Gain: By letting physics do the work, Extropic claims 10,000x energy efficiency improvements over digital GPUs for Energy-Based Models (EBMs).⁹

8.2 Why this is the "Deep Truth"

This represents a return to "Analog" computing but with a thermodynamic twist. It aligns with Landauer's principle by operating near the noise floor rather than spending energy to stay above it. It creates a computer that "feels" the answer through energy minimization, rather than calculating it through logic gates.¹³

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of Computation Substrates

Part V: Synthesis and Verdict

9. The Convergence: Thermodynamic Active Inference

The forensic analysis leads to a singular conclusion: The simplest, efficient strategy is the unification of Active Inference software with Thermodynamic hardware.

9.1 The Theoretical Unification

The "Deep Truth" is that Active Inference and Thermodynamic Computing are describing the exact same process at different layers of abstraction.

• Software Layer: The Active Inference agent seeks to minimize Variational Free Energy (information theoretic surprise).
• Hardware Layer: The Thermodynamic chip seeks to minimize Gibbs Free Energy (physical energy).
• The Blueprint: If we instantiate an Active Inference agent's Generative Model (specifically an Energy-Based Model) directly onto a Thermodynamic Sampling Unit, the physical relaxation of the chip is the reasoning of the mind. The chip "thinks" by settling into the most probable state defined by the agent's beliefs and sensory inputs.¹³

This removes the "simulation layer" entirely. We are no longer simulating a probabilistic mind on a deterministic chip; we are building a probabilistic mind on a probabilistic chip. This is the Maximum Efficiency pathway.

9.2 The "Reformist" Bridge (The Actionable Steps Today)

Since Thermodynamic hardware is still in the prototype phase (TRL 4-5) ⁴¹, a pragmatic "simplest" strategy for today involves a hybrid approach:

1. Software: Adopt Active Inference architectures (via Verses or open-source PyMDP) to build agents that are data-efficient and grounded.
2. Hardware Optimization: Compile these models using BitNet b1.58 quantization. This allows deployment on standard hardware (CPUs/Edge) with extreme efficiency, mimicking the low-precision nature of the biological brain and preparing the architectural logic for the eventual transition to thermodynamic substrates.²³

10. Red Team Assessment and Risks

A "Deep Truth" analysis must confront the failure modes.

10.1 The "Hardware Lottery" Risk

The dominance of NVIDIA and the Transformer architecture creates a massive moat. Tooling (PyTorch, JAX) is optimized for matrix multiplication, not energy-based sampling. The "activation energy" required to switch the entire industry to a new stack (Thermodynamic/Active Inference) is immense. History shows that technically superior technologies often fail due to lack of ecosystem support (e.g., Lisp machines vs. Unix).⁸

10.2 The Complexity of Active Inference

Active Inference is mathematically dense. Implementing it requires solving intractable integrals (marginalizing over all possible states). While Thermodynamic computing solves this physically, programming these chips to represent specific semantic concepts is a largely unsolved engineering challenge. There is a risk that the "compilation" step (turning a desire into an energy landscape) becomes the new bottleneck.⁴³

10.3 Vaporware and Hype

Both Verses AI and Extropic are startups with bold claims (AGI by 2026, 10,000x efficiency). While their first-principles reasoning is sound, their benchmarks are often on "toy problems" (e.g., MNIST, simple grid worlds) rather than the massive scale of GPT-4. There is a non-zero probability that practical engineering hurdles (e.g., thermal noise control, interconnect latency) derail the theoretical gains.³⁸

11. Final Verdict and Strategic Blueprint

Topic: What is the simplest, yet efficient strategy to create highly intelligent digital minds?

The Verdict:

The brute-force simulation of intelligence via Transformers on GPUs is a thermodynamic dead end. The Simplest, Efficient Strategy is to construct Thermodynamic Active Inference Agents.

The Blueprint for the Creator:

1. Architecture: Abandon the "Next-Token Prediction" objective. Adopt the Active Inference architecture (minimizing free energy) as the governing logic. This provides agency, robustness, and sample efficiency.
2. Representation: Utilize Energy-Based Models (EBMs) or Renormalizing Generative Models (RGMs) to represent knowledge. These are the natural language of both robust reasoning and physical physics.
3. Optimization (Immediate): Quantize all models to 1.58-bit (ternary) precision using the BitNet recipe. This enables immediate deployment on commodity hardware with "neuromorphic-like" efficiency.
4. Instantiation (Ultimate): As technology matures (2026-2028), migrate the EBM/Active Inference workload to Thermodynamic Sampling Units (TSUs). This aligns the computational substrate with the nature of the mind, unlocking the final orders of magnitude in efficiency required for ubiquitous AGI.

The "Deep Truth": Intelligence is not code; it is a physical process of entropy reduction. The most efficient mind is one that does not fight the laws of physics, but harnesses them.

Detailed Technical Addendum

A.1 BitNet b1.58 Performance Metrics

Recent benchmarks confirm the efficacy of the 1-bit approach.

• Latency: BitNet b1.58 achieves speedups of 2.37x to 6.17x on x86 CPUs compared to FP16 baselines.²⁶
• Energy: Energy consumption is reduced by 71.9% to 82.2% for matrix multiplications.²⁶
• Throughput: On a single CPU, a 100B parameter BitNet model can run at human reading speeds (5-7 tokens/second), a feat impossible with FP16 models.26This validates the "Reformist" track: efficiency is available now, hidden under the bloat of floating-point precision.

A.2 The "Genius" of Active Inference

Verses AI's "Genius" platform attempts to solve the "Interoperability" problem. Current AI models are silos. Active Inference agents in Genius communicate via the Hyperspatial Modeling Language (HSML), a protocol that allows agents to share "context" and "belief states" rather than just raw data. This allows for a "System of Systems" approach, which is simpler to scale than a single monolithic model.³⁹

A.3 Extropic's Noise Model

Extropic's X0 prototype validates that Gaussian noise (thermal fluctuations) can be harnessed to sample from complex distributions. Their "Denoising Thermodynamic Model" utilizes the hardware's natural drift to reverse diffusion processes, effectively generating data by "cooling" the noise into structure. This confirms that the hardware can natively run the generative algorithms that GPUs struggle to simulate.⁹

Works cited

1. AI Beyond the Scaling Laws | HEC Paris, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.hec.edu/en/dare/tech-ai/ai-beyond-scaling-laws
2. Scaling Law Won't Stall — But Scaling Law's Log Will Break Us | by Jianing Qi | Dec, 2025, accessed January 15, 2026, https://j-qi.medium.com/scaling-law-wont-stall-but-scaling-law-s-log-will-break-us-e4d036b483f2
3. Why AGI Will Not Happen - Tim Dettmers, accessed January 15, 2026, https://timdettmers.com/2025/12/10/why-agi-will-not-happen/
4. Technology and Innovation Report 2025: Inclusive Artificial Intelligence for Development - UNCTAD, accessed January 15, 2026, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tir2025_en.pdf
5. The energy challenges of artificial superintelligence - PMC - NIH, accessed January 15, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10629395/
6. AI monopoly and why it backfires on talent management | Industrial and Organizational Psychology | Cambridge Core, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/industrial-and-organizational-psychology/article/ai-monopoly-and-why-it-backfires-on-talent-management/5910B08DD766A2946C2B5E90F2877047
7. Will Giant Companies Always Have a Monopoly on Top AI Models? | ACLU, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/will-giant-companies-always-have-a-monopoly-on-top-ai-models
8. Can GPUs avoid the AI energy wall, or will neuromorphic computing become inevitable?, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/1nco5vx/can_gpus_avoid_the_ai_energy_wall_or_will/
9. An efficient probabilistic hardware architecture for diffusion-like models - arXiv, accessed January 15, 2026, https://arxiv.org/html/2510.23972v1
10. Neurosymbolic AI as an antithesis to scaling laws | PNAS Nexus - Oxford Academic, accessed January 15, 2026, https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/4/5/pgaf117/8134151
11. Breaking the gatekeepers: how AI will revolutionize scientific funding - Frontiers, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/artificial-intelligence/articles/10.3389/frai.2025.1667752/full
12. The digital repression of social movements, protest, and activism: A synthetic review - PMC, accessed January 15, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10953837/
13. Thermodynamic Computing: From Zero to One | Extropic, accessed January 15, 2026, https://extropic.ai/writing/thermodynamic-computing-from-zero-to-one
14. Thermodynamic Computing Becomes Cool - Communications of the ACM, accessed January 15, 2026, https://cacm.acm.org/news/thermodynamic-computing-becomes-cool/
15. The 10,000x Energy Revolution: How Thermodynamic Computing Could Rewrite the Rules of AI | by Pedro Miguel Lourenço | Medium, accessed January 15, 2026, https://medium.com/@pedromlourenco/the-10-000x-energy-revolution-how-thermodynamic-computing-could-rewrite-the-rules-of-ai-4dc17e413347
16. TSU 101: An Entirely New Type of Computing Hardware | Extropic, accessed January 15, 2026, https://extropic.ai/writing/tsu-101-an-entirely-new-type-of-computing-hardware
17. Test-time Computing: from System-1 Thinking to System-2 Thinking - arXiv, accessed January 15, 2026, https://arxiv.org/html/2501.02497v1
18. Learning to reason with LLMs | OpenAI, accessed January 15, 2026, https://openai.com/index/learning-to-reason-with-llms/
19. Marco-o1: Towards Open Reasoning Models for Open-Ended Solutions - arXiv, accessed January 15, 2026, https://arxiv.org/html/2411.14405v1
20. OpenAI o1 Results on ARC-AGI-Pub - ARC Prize, accessed January 15, 2026, https://arcprize.org/blog/openai-o1-results-arc-prize
21. OpenAI o3 Breakthrough High Score on ARC-AGI-Pub, accessed January 15, 2026, https://arcprize.org/blog/oai-o3-pub-breakthrough
22. Explaining OpenAI's o1 Breakthrough: The Revolution of Test Time Compute - Medium, accessed January 15, 2026, https://medium.com/wix-engineering/explaining-openais-o1-breakthrough-the-revolution-of-test-time-compute-ecebe8ef9379
23. BitNet: 1-bit Pre-training for Large Language Models, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.jmlr.org/papers/v26/24-2050.html
24. 1-bit AI Infra: Part 1.1, Fast and Lossless BitNet b1.58 Inference on CPUs - arXiv, accessed January 15, 2026, https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16144
25. Llama.cpp now supports BitNet! : r/LocalLLaMA - Reddit, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1dmt4v7/llamacpp_now_supports_bitnet/
26. microsoft/BitNet: Official inference framework for 1-bit LLMs - GitHub, accessed January 15, 2026, https://github.com/microsoft/BitNet
27. BitNet: 1-bit Pre-training for Large Language Models - Journal of Machine Learning Research, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume26/24-2050/24-2050.pdf
28. BitNet: 1-bit Pre-training for Large Language Models - Journal of Machine Learning Research, accessed January 15, 2026, http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume26/24-2050/24-2050.pdf
29. Critical review of LeCun's Introductory JEPA paper | Medium - Malcolm Lett, accessed January 15, 2026, https://malcolmlett.medium.com/critical-review-of-lecuns-introductory-jepa-paper-fabe5783134e
30. Summary of Yann LeCun's interview at GTC 2025 : r/singularity - Reddit, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jwc7ow/summary_of_yann_lecuns_interview_at_gtc_2025/
31. Yann LeCun's Home Page, accessed January 15, 2026, http://yann.lecun.com/
32. From artificial intelligence to active inference: the key to true AI and the 6G world brain [Invited] - Optica Publishing Group, accessed January 15, 2026, https://opg.optica.org/jocn/abstract.cfm?uri=jocn-18-1-A28
33. Free energy and inference in living systems | Interface Focus | The Royal Society, accessed January 15, 2026, https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsfs/article/13/3/20220041/89425/Free-energy-and-inference-in-living-systemsFree
34. Smarter by Nature - Verses.ai, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.verses.ai/research
35. Active Inference: Applicability to Different Types of Social Organization Explained through Reference to Industrial Engineering - Semantic Scholar, accessed January 15, 2026, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e27c/9d3d1672975348e370190d39e8e8ee77fdcf.pdf
36. Video about Friston's new article "From pixels to planning: scale-free active inference". : r/singularity - Reddit, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1exwqds/video_about_fristons_new_article_from_pixels_to/
37. [VERSES Research Lab] From pixels to planning: scale-free active inference (VERSES wants to achieve AGI by January 2026) : r/singularity - Reddit, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1eli43v/verses_research_lab_from_pixels_to_planning/
38. AGI just got a lot closer : r/singularity - Reddit, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/18m38vc/agi_just_got_a_lot_closer/
39. Active Inference - Verses AI, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.verses.ai/active-inference-research
40. Thermodynamic computing system for AI applications - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH, accessed January 15, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12015238/
41. Inside X0 and XTR-0 - Extropic, accessed January 15, 2026, https://extropic.ai/writing/inside-x0-and-xtr-0
42. Reimagining AI Efficiency: A Practical Guide to Using BitNet's 1-Bit LLM on CPUs Without Sacrificing Performance | by Kondwani Nyirenda | Medium, accessed January 15, 2026, https://medium.com/@kondwani0099/reimagining-ai-efficiency-a-practical-guide-to-using-bitnets-1-bit-llm-on-cpus-without-ef804d3fb875
43. We Solved Active Inference. Friston Was Right, But Implementations Have Been Wrong., accessed January 15, 2026, https://medium.com/@mbonsign/we-solved-active-inference-friston-was-right-but-implementations-have-been-wrong-fafbd5d22f31
44. Neuromorphic Computing: Insights and Challenges, accessed January 15, 2026, http://ornlcda.github.io/neuromorphic2016/presentations/Hylton-ORNLNeuromorphicComputingtalk-June2016.pdf
45. Analysis of Extropic AI's “TC” (“Thermodynamic Computing”); Utilizing Gemini 2.5 Pro Deep Research & Grok 3 : r/ArtificialInteligence - Reddit, accessed January 15, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtificialInteligence/comments/1mor2lc/analysis_of_extropic_ais_tc_thermodynamic/
46. VERSES AI Research Reveals Real-World Use Cases for Active Inference AI, accessed January 15, 2026, https://deniseholt.us/verses-ai-research-reveals-real-world-use-cases-for-active-inference-ai/

Ai Collaboration ::: Gemini 3.0