Teaching Stack of Models for TAI-KPI

Minimum Viable Language of Modeling Frameworks for AI Literacy

1. Why a “Teaching Stack” of Models?

TAI-KPI isn’t just a curriculum about AI. It’s a language of models that helps humans understand:

  • how our own cognition and emotions work,

  • how socio-technical systems amplify or ease stress,

  • how AI systems mirror and reshape our world-models, and

  • how trust can grow from the bottom up in a fractured, post-colonial world.

No single diagram can carry all of that. Instead, we use a stack of simple, interlocking models—each one a different lens:

  • Automata of cognition

  • Expectation–Mismatch Stress (EMS) & Window of Tolerance

  • Bayesian Brain & Weather Forecasting

  • Markov Blankets & Boundaries

  • Cellular Automata & Social Emergence

  • Trust Dynamics in System-Dynamics form

  • Holarchy & Reverse Mentoring

  • AI as a Theory-of-Mind Mirror

Together, these give students, AI developers, and community organizers a shared vocabulary that can travel across disciplines, cultures, and power gradients.

The teaching stack is our “minimum viable language” for describing how intelligence, trust, and power flow in a VUCA world.


2. Model 1 – Automata of Cognition

Reflex • Pattern • Integrative Layers

Purpose Give learners a compact, non-pathologizing map of human cognition that foregrounds emotion and embodiment.

Key Ideas

  • Reflex Automaton – fast somatic responses, polyvagal survival modes, “snake or stick?” decisions.

  • Pattern Automaton – emotional & associative flow; habits; narrative templates; subconscious priors.

  • Integrative Layer – awareness, meaning, attention aperture; active inference; self-observation; wisdom.

Teaching Moves

  • Use lived examples: a startle response, a conflict, a moment of regret.

  • Ask: “Which layer was driving?” and “What other layer might you want online next time?”

  • Emphasize that all three layers are intelligent; the Integrative Layer coordinates them.

Curricular Role

  • This is the anchor model.

  • Other metaphors (EMS, weather, Markov blankets, trust dynamics) all plug back into it.


3. Model 2 – EMS & the Window of Tolerance

Expectation–Mismatch Stress as Cognitive Load

Purpose Reframe “trauma” as Expectation–Mismatch Stress (EMS) and introduce the Window of Tolerance / attention aperture as a flexible, trainable capacity.

Key Ideas

  • EMS = cumulative strain when expectations repeatedly fail to match reality.

  • Shows up as anxiety, numbness, irritability, distraction, or collapse.

  • Window of Tolerance = the range in which the Integrative Layer can stay online and keep all three automata in dialogue.

  • Contemplative, somatic, and relational practices widen this window over time.

Teaching Moves

  • Invite students to sketch their own Window of Tolerance and label “too much / too little” activation.

  • Link back to the automata:

    • Narrow window → Reflex dominates, Pattern rigidifies, Integrative goes offline.

    • Wider window → Integrative can re-interpret signals and reweight emotional priors.

Curricular Role

  • Bridges personal experience (stress, burnout, anxiety) with systemic forces (VUCA, climate crisis, AI disruption).

  • Sets the tone for a trauma-informed, non-blaming conversation.


4. Model 3 – Bayesian Brain & Weather Forecasting

“Your Mind as a Climate Model”

Purpose Explain active inference in plain language: we are all forecasting machines.

Key Ideas

  • The nervous system constantly predicts what will happen next and updates its “climate model” of life.

  • Forecast = prior expectations.

  • Weather event = incoming experience.

  • Prediction error = mismatch between forecast and reality.

  • Chronic EMS is like living in permanent storm mode, even on clear days.

Teaching Moves

  • Ask: “What forecasts did you learn growing up? About safety, authority, conflict, success?”

  • Explore how new experiences and communities help update the climate model.

  • Connect to Integrative Layer: it’s the “climate scientist” that can question old forecasts and design new ones.

Curricular Role

  • Makes Active Inference intuitive.

  • Prepares the ground for talking about AI as another kind of forecasting system—but without a body or emotions.


5. Model 4 – Markov Blankets & Boundaries

Where Self Meets World

Purpose Offer a visual language for boundaries—psychological, social, and institutional—without heavy math.

Key Ideas

  • A Markov blanket is a conceptual boundary between “inside” and “outside” of a system.

  • For humans: body, identity, role, and community all act as layered blankets.

  • For institutions: policies, dashboards, and AI systems act as blankets between leadership and lived reality.

  • Healthy blankets allow porous, meaningful exchange; unhealthy ones either leak or harden.

Teaching Moves

  • Have learners draw their own “layers”: body, family, peers, institution, platform, planet.

  • Ask: “Where does information flow freely? Where does it get blocked or distorted?”

  • Connect to EMS: rigid blankets trap old priors; open, well-governed blankets allow updating and repair.

Curricular Role

  • Prepares students to think about AI governance and interfaces as boundary design problems.

  • Integrates holarchy: individuals and institutions as nested blankets.


6. Model 5 – Cellular Automata & Social Emergence

Micro-Rules, Macro-Patterns

Purpose Show how local interaction rules create large-scale social patterns, making the Avalanche of Kindness plausible rather than utopian.

Key Ideas

  • Each person is a small automaton (Reflex–Pattern–Integrative).

  • Simple rules (listen, retaliate, forgive, share, exclude) generate complex group behavior.

  • Trust, polarization, cooperation, and collapse emerge from these micro-rules.

  • Changing the rules ≈ changing the future trajectory of society.

Teaching Moves

  • Run or show simple cellular automata (e.g., Conway’s Game of Life) or agent-based demos.

  • Ask: “What micro-rules around you are feeding conflict or extraction?”

  • Then: “What micro-rules could feed prosocial cascades?”

Curricular Role

  • Makes it thinkable that college meetups and developer communities matter: changing local rules really does influence global patterns, especially in a networked world.

  • Connects naturally to Kindness Thermodynamics and trust dynamics.


7. Model 6 – Trust Dynamics as a System-Dynamics Loop

Trust as a Stock, EMS as a Load

Purpose Give a simple system-dynamics picture of how trust accumulates and depletes over time, so learners see why process and governance matter as much as insight.

Key Ideas

  • Trust = a stock that can rise (through repair, reliability, shared risk) or fall (through betrayal, opacity, neglect).

  • Flows that increase trust: transparency, follow-through, fair conflict resolution, shared vulnerability, inclusive design.

  • Flows that decrease trust: secrecy, extractive AI deployments, broken promises, unresolved harms, colonial patterns.

  • EMS acts as friction in the system:

    • higher EMS → slower trust accumulation, faster trust decay.

  • Prosocial emergence requires trust thresholds: enough trust in enough nodes for new patterns to be stable.

Teaching Moves

  • Draw a simple stock-and-flow diagram: Trust Reservoir with “Trust Inflow” and “Trust Outflow”.

  • Invite participants to list real behaviors or policies that belong on each valve.

  • Connect to Integrative Layer: leaders and teams can deliberately design trust-building loops instead of assuming trust will appear by itself.

Curricular Role

  • Links internal work (widening the Window of Tolerance) with structural work (changing rules, policies, AI use).

  • Makes it easier to talk about bottom-up transformation: student & developer meetups are “trust pumps” connecting layers of the holarchy.


8. Model 7 – Holarchy & Reverse Mentoring

Bottom-Up Intelligence in Nested Systems

Purpose Show how knowledge, care, and imagination can flow upward through a hierarchy without collapsing into rebellion or co-optation.

Key Ideas

  • Holarchy = nested wholes (individuals → teams → orgs → regions → planet).

  • Each level has local intelligence and constraints.

  • Reverse mentoring = structured pathways for insights from younger / less powerful nodes to influence decision-makers.

  • When combined with the shared modeling language, reverse mentoring becomes a translation channel:

    • students and developers bring VIM / EMS / automata language upward,

    • leaders learn to reinterpret their own prediction models through these lenses.

Teaching Moves

  • Map participants’ own institutions as holarchies.

  • Identify possible reverse-mentoring channels: advisory councils, intergenerational task forces, student–faculty–admin circles, community–developer–policymaker forums.

  • Emphasize post-colonial ethos:

    • the point is not “saving” others, but listening and integrating diverse world-models.

Curricular Role

  • Explains how TAI-KPI ideas can move from classrooms and meetups into leadership and policy.

  • Frames prosocial AI work as intergenerational and intercultural co-learning, not top-down tech transfer.


9. Model 8 – AI as a Theory-of-Mind Mirror

Practicing Metacognition With Machines

Purpose Use AI tools themselves as practice grounds for theory of mind, critical thinking, and emotional literacy.

Key Ideas

  • AI systems don’t feel, but they can simulate perspectives and highlight patterns in our own thinking.

  • Interacting with AI can help learners:

    • see their own assumptions mirrored back,

    • explore multiple framings of the same situation,

    • practice asking “what else might be going on here?”

  • In a trauma-informed context, AI is not a therapist; it is a structured reflection partner.

Teaching Moves

  • Design prompts that ask AI to:

    • generate alternative stories about a conflict,

    • outline different stakeholders’ viewpoints,

    • suggest questions a wise mentor might ask.

  • Always debrief:

    • Where did the AI miss important context?

    • What biases did it reveal?

    • What did you notice in your own emotional response?

Curricular Role

  • Ties together the whole teaching stack:

    • automata of cognition,

    • EMS & Window of Tolerance,

    • weather/forecasting,

    • Markov blankets,

    • social emergence,

    • trust dynamics,

    • holarchy, into a living practice with real tools.


10. Putting It All Together for a Proposal

In a proposal, you can summarize the teaching stack like this:

  • Automata of Cognition + Integrative Layer – foundational model for individual intelligence.

  • EMS + Window of Tolerance – trauma-informed lens for stress and learning.

  • Bayesian Brain / Weather Forecasting – intuitive explanation of active inference.

  • Markov Blankets & Boundaries – design language for interfaces and governance.

  • Cellular Automata & Social Emergence – explanation of how local behavior scales to global patterns.

  • Trust System Dynamics – practical tool for redesigning institutions and AI deployments.

  • Holarchy + Reverse Mentoring – strategy for bottom-up, post-colonial transformation.

  • AI as Theory-of-Mind Mirror – applied practice for AI literacy and metacognition.

TAI-KPI does not ask students to believe a new ideology. It gives them a shared set of models to see how human, organizational, and AI systems actually behave—and to design prosocial, trauma-informed alternatives from the bottom up.

Last updated