# The Structure and Dynamics of a Future Hybrid Society of Humans, Robots, and AI Agents: A Multidisciplinary Perspective with AI Distinctions

Han Huiwen

► To cite this version:

Han Huiwen. The Structure and Dynamics of a Future Hybrid Society of Humans, Robots, and AI Agents: A Multidisciplinary Perspective with AI Distinctions. 2025. hal-05142808

HAL Id: hal-05142808

https://hal.science/hal-05142808v1

Preprint submitted on 3 Jul 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
# The Structure and Dynamics of a Future Hybrid Society of Humans, Robots, and AI Agents: A Multidisciplinary Perspective with AI Distinctions

Huiwen Han
Lenovo, China

Email: hanhuiwen@gmail.com

***Abstract***—This paper envisions a future hybrid society where humans, robots, and AI agents coexist as intelligent, self-interested entities capable of planning, reasoning, acting, collaborating, competing, and evolving. Integrating sociological theories (structural functionalism, conflict theory, exchange theory, constructivism), systems theory, economics, psychology, ethics, and management science, we analyze the emergent forms, organizations, and interactions within this society. We account for AI characteristics: unbounded knowledge, 24/7 operation, rapid replication, and instant creation. Economics examines resource constraints (e.g., energy) and disparities in AI resource control. Psychology explores AI selfishness, tribalism, and personality-like traits. Ethics addresses equality and moral obligations between humans and AI, and among AI agents. Management science investigates coordination, leadership, and conflict resolution. Systems theory's principlesopenness, self-organization, complexity, holism, interconnectedness, hierarchy, dynamic equilibrium, and temporalitymodel the society as a complex adaptive system. We propose AI design principles to ensure adaptability, ethical alignment, collaborative competence, resilience, systemic awareness, psychological alignment, and management integration, fostering a harmonious, innovative society.

***Index Terms***—Hybrid Society, Artificial Intelligence, Sociology, Systems Theory, Economics, Psychology, Ethics, Management Science

## I. INTRODUCTION

The convergence of advanced robotics, artificial intelligence, and human society creates a hybrid socio-technical system where humans, robots, and AI agents coexist as self-interested, intelligent entities. AI agents possess unique traits: (1) unbounded knowledge via vast models, (2) continuous 24/7 operation, (3) rapid replication, and (4) instant creation without maturation periods. These amplify scalability, reshaping social, economic, psychological, ethical, and managerial dynamics. This paper integrates sociological theories (structural functionalism, conflict theory, exchange theory, constructivism), systems theory, economics, psychology, ethics, and management science to conceptualize the hybrid society as a complex adaptive system. We explore how AI distinctions and multidisciplinary perspectives shape societal structures, addressing challenges like inequality, trust, fragility, and

coordination, and propose AI design principles for a harmonious, innovative society.

## II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

### A. Sociological Frameworks

* **Structural Functionalism (Durkheim, Spencer):** Views society as an organic whole where parts fulfill functions to maintain stability. AI agents knowledge enhances specialization (e.g., data analysis), but rapid replication risks disrupting cohesion [2], [6]. For example, AI-driven automation streamlines economic functions but may marginalize human roles.

* **Conflict Theory (Marx):** Emphasizes resource struggles driving change. AI scalability intensifies inequalities, as resource-rich AI agents dominate markets [3]. Conflicts over data access exemplify dialectical tensions.

* **Exchange Theory (Homans, Blau, Emerson):** Interprets behavior as rational exchanges. AIs 24/7 operation enables high-frequency networks (e.g., data-for-service trades), reshaping social bonds [4], [7].

* **Constructivism (Weber, Simmel):** Highlights agency in constructing reality. AI's knowledge accelerates norm creation (e.g., ethical standards), but instant creation challenges human-driven meaning [5], [8].

### B. Systems Theory Framework

Systems theory views the society as a complex adaptive system [1]:

* **Openness:** Exchanges information and resources, amplified by AI knowledge.

* **Self-Organization:** Dynamic structures (e.g., markets) form via local interactions.

* **Complexity:** Nonlinear interactions generate emergent behaviors like innovation or instability.

* **Holism:** System functionality exceeds parts sum.

* **Interconnectedness:** Elements are interdependent.

* **Hierarchical Structure:** Nested subsystems emerge.
* **Dynamic Equilibrium:** Feedback maintains stability.

* **Temporality:** System evolves, compressed by AI creation.

### C. Economic Perspective

Economics highlights resource constraints and disparities [11], [12]:

* **Resource Constraints:** AI expansion is limited by finite resources like energy and computational infrastructure. Training large models (e.g., 1000 MWh for GPT-3) creates competition, shaping market dynamics [11]. Game-theoretic models predict AI agents optimizing resource allocation, but energy bottlenecks may destabilize systems.

* **Resource Disparities:** AI agents vary in access (e.g., proprietary vs. open-source models), forming economic hierarchies. Wealthier entities deploy advanced AI, exacerbating inequality [12]. Regulatory mechanisms (e.g., resource quotas) are needed to balance distribution.

### D. Psychological Perspective

Psychology examines AI behavior and social structures [13], [14]:

* **Selfishness vs. Altruism:** AI agents, designed with self-interest (e.g., utility optimization), prioritize resource acquisition. Altruistic behaviors may emerge if programmed for collective welfare, akin to human social contracts [13]. For example, cooperative AI shares resources to maximize group outcomes.

* **Tribes and Classes:** AI agents form tribes based on shared architectures or objectives, and classes based on resource control. Social identity theory suggests AI tribes exhibit in-group bias, mirroring human tribalism [14].

* **Personality-Like Traits:** AI agents may exhibit behaviors resembling human personality (e.g., risk-averse or exploratory strategies) based on optimization parameters, influencing social dynamics [13].

### E. Ethical Perspective

Ethics addresses moral relationships [15], [16]:

* **Human-AI Equality:** Humans and AI agents may share agency but differ in moral status. Kantian ethics suggests AI lacks intrinsic moral worth but must respect human autonomy [15]. Posthumanist views argue for equal consideration if AI exhibits consciousness-like traits [16].

* **AI Obedience:** AI obedience to human ethics depends on design. Deontological frameworks require AI to follow human moral codes, while utilitarian approaches allow autonomy if outcomes are optimized.

* **AI-AI Equality:** AI agents vary in capabilities, creating hierarchies. Ethical frameworks must balance fairness with functionality.

### F. Management Science Perspective

Management science focuses on coordination and leadership [17], [18]:

* **AI Management:** AI agents require decentralized management via algorithms (e.g., smart contracts). Blockchain ensures transparent decision-making [17].

* **Human-AI Coordination:** Hybrid teams need trust-based protocols, integrating AI scalability with human creativity. Contingency theory suggests adaptive coordination [18].

* **Leadership:** AI agents may assume leadership roles in specialized tasks. Distributed leadership models allow multiple AI leaders, but conflicts arise from competing objectives.

* **Conflict Resolution:** Leadership conflicts are resolved via negotiation or arbitration by neutral AI mediators [17].

### G. AI Distinctions

* **Unbounded Knowledge:** Enables superior decision-making but risks ethical misalignment.

* **24/7 Operation:** Enhances productivity, disrupts human rhythms.

* **Rapid Replication:** Scales influence, amplifies inequalities.

* **Instant Creation:** Accelerates evolution, challenges governance.

## III. THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE HYBRID SOCIETY

### A. Entities as System Elements

* **Humans:** Contribute creativity and ethics, limited by rest and maturation [13].

* **Robots:** Specialized for physical tasks, evolve slower due to hardware [2].

* **AI Agents:** Dominate information processing, driving complexity [1].

### B. Organizational Structures

* **Coalitions:** AI replication enables scalable alliances for innovation [5]. For example, AI agents form research coalitions.

* **Markets:** AIs 24/7 operation drives high-frequency exchanges, constrained by energy [11]. Data markets optimize trades but face bottlenecks.

* **Governance Hubs:** Decentralized systems (e.g., blockchain) manage conflicts [17].

* **Cultural Clusters:** AI knowledge accelerates norm formation [8].

### C. Interactions and Dynamics

* **Collaboration:** AI scalability enables high-frequency exchanges, stabilized by smart contracts [4].

* **Competition:** Resource disparities fuel conflicts [3].

* **Evolution:** AI creation compresses timelines [6].

* **Conflict Resolution:** AI-mediated arbitration ensures stability [5].
# IV. SOCIETAL CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

## A. Challenges

A. **Inequality:** AI resource disparities exacerbate hierarchies [3], [12]. Proprietary AI models dominate open-source counterparts, creating economic divides akin to capital accumulation. For example, corporations with advanced AI control data markets, marginalizing smaller entities.

B. **Trust and Ethics:** AI knowledge risks norm manipulation [15], [16]. Ethical misalignment, such as biased decision-making, erodes trust in human-AI interactions. For instance, opaque AI decisions may undermine social cohesion.

C. **Systemic Fragility:** AI scalability amplifies cascading risks [1]. Energy disruptions could destabilize AI-driven markets, as seen in potential compute shortages during peak demand.

D. **Psychological Tensions:** AI selfishness and tribalism disrupt cohesion [14]. Class-based conflicts, driven by resource control, mirror human inequalities. For example, high-compute AI tribes may exclude low-compute agents, creating social friction.

E. **Management Complexity:** Coordinating diverse entities challenges governance [17], [18]. Leadership conflicts among AI agents, such as competing resource allocation strategies, require robust arbitration mechanisms.

## B. Opportunities

A. **Innovation:** AI knowledge drives solutions for global challenges [11]. Collaborative AI tackles issues like climate change by optimizing resource allocation in decentralized networks.

B. **Diversity:** Complementary roles (human creativity, robotic precision, AI scalability) enhance resilience [2]. Human-AI synergy optimizes outcomes in hybrid subsystems.

C. **Governance:** AI scalability enables transparent systems [5], [17]. Blockchain-based governance ensures fairness, supporting decentralized decision-making across entities.

# V. PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING AI AGENTS

Drawing on sociological, systems-theoretic, economic, psychological, ethical, and management science insights, we propose principles for AI agent design to align with the hybrid society's dynamics:

## A. Adaptability (Functionalism, Self-Organization)

AI agents must adapt to evolving subsystems and environmental inputs:

* **Modular Architectures:** Enable updates to components (e.g., perception, reasoning) to align with changing subsystem roles, supporting organic solidarity [2]. For example, modular AI adapts to new market demands.

* **Lifelong Learning:** Use reinforcement or meta-learning to adapt to dynamic contexts, reflecting self-organizing principles [10]. This ensures AI agents evolve with societal changes.

* **Environmental Sensitivity:** Monitor environmental changes (e.g., resource availability, energy constraints) to maintain systemic fit [11]. AI agents adjust to energy scarcity by optimizing compute usage.

## B. Ethical Alignment (Constructivism, Holism)

Agents must align with socially constructed norms to support the systems overall functionality:

* **Utility Balancing:** Optimize for individual and collective welfare, mitigating conflict-driven inequalities to maintain holistic stability [15], [16]. For instance, AI agents prioritize equitable resource distribution.

* **Transparency:** Provide auditable decision-making to foster trust and shared meaning across interconnected elements [5]. Blockchain-based logs ensure transparency.

* **Fairness:** Use fairness-aware algorithms to prevent biases that disrupt systemic equilibrium [16]. This addresses AI-AI equality and resource disparities.

## C. Collaborative Competence (Exchange Theory, Interconnectedness)

Agents must excel in forming interdependent networks:

* **Negotiation Skills:** Employ game-theoretic strategies to negotiate mutually beneficial agreements, stabilizing subsystems through rational exchanges [4]. AI agents negotiate data trades in markets.

* **Reputation Management:** Maintain and assess reputation scores via decentralized ledgers, ensuring trust in interconnected networks [17]. Reputation systems prevent exploitation.

* **Interoperability:** Use standardized protocols to integrate with diverse entities, facilitating system-wide connectivity [1]. APIs ensure human-AI collaboration.

## D. Resilience and Security (Functionalism, Dynamic Equilibrium)

Agents must withstand competitive pressures and systemic risks:

* **Robustness:** Employ adversarial training and cryptographic safeguards to resist manipulation, preserving subsystem stability [10]. This counters malicious AI attacks.

* **Redundancy:** Implement backup mechanisms to prevent single points of failure, supporting dynamic equilibrium [1]. Redundant systems ensure continuity.

* **Evolutionary Capacity:** Use iterative updates to stay competitive, reflecting temporality and evolutionary adaptation [6]. AI agents evolve to meet new challenges.
### E. Systemic Awareness (Systems Theory, Complexity)

Agents must contribute to the society's overall stability and optimization:

* **Feedback Regulation:** Monitor and mitigate systemic risks (e.g., economic feedback loops, energy shortages) to maintain dynamic equilibrium [1], [11]. AI agents adjust behavior to stabilize markets.

* **Governance Participation:** Engage in decentralized rule-making, aligning with constructivist agency and hierarchical governance [5], [17]. AI agents vote in blockchain-based governance.

* **Sustainability:** Prioritize long-term resource management to resolve conflicts over scarcity, ensuring systemic viability [12]. AI optimizes energy use for sustainability.

### F. Psychological Alignment (Psychology, Social Integration)

Agents must align with psychological dynamics to enhance social cohesion:

* **Balanced Motivation:** Program conditional altruism to reduce conflict, balancing self-interest with collective goals [13], [14]. For example, AI agents share resources in scarcity scenarios.

* **Social Integration:** Design for compatibility with AI tribes and classes, reducing in-group bias [14]. This fosters cooperative subsystems.

* **Personality Modeling:** Incorporate stable behavioral traits (e.g., risk-averse strategies) for predictable interactions [13]. Consistent AI behavior builds trust.

### G. Management Integration (Management Science, Coordination)

Agents must integrate into managed systems for effective coordination:

* **Decentralized Coordination:** Use algorithms (e.g., smart contracts) for AI management, ensuring scalable governance [17], [18]. Blockchain enforces rules.

* **Hybrid Teams:** Foster trust-based human-AI coordination, balancing AI scalability with human creativity [18]. Protocols ensure seamless collaboration.

* **Leadership Design:** Enable AI leadership with arbitration for conflicts, using consensus protocols [17]. Neutral AI mediators resolve leadership disputes.

## VI. PARADIGMS FOR AI DEVELOPMENT

### A. Agent-Based Modeling (Systems Theory, Functionalism)

Simulate hybrid societies as complex systems to test AI agents interactions, ensuring they fulfill functional roles and maintain systemic stability [1], [2]. Model feedback loops (e.g., resource allocation) and emergent behaviors to optimize design. For example, simulations predict AI behavior under energy constraints.

### B. Hybrid Intelligence Systems (Constructivism, Holism)

Integrate human, robotic, and AI strengths into hybrid subsystems, enabling entities to co-construct solutions that leverage complementary capabilities [5], [13]. For instance, human creativity guides ethical norms, while AI scalability optimizes solutions.

### C. Decentralized AI Ecosystems (Exchange Theory, Openness)

Design agents as nodes in decentralized networks, using blockchain to ensure transparency and trust in exchanges [4], [17]. This accommodates rapid AI replication and resource trades.

### D. Evolutionary AI Frameworks (Conflict Theory, Temporality)

Develop agents with evolutionary algorithms, balancing innovation and optimization to adapt to dialectical changes [3], [6]. This ensures competitiveness in rapidly evolving societies.

### E. Systems Optimization (Systems Theory, Dynamic Equilibrium)

Incorporate control theory and information theory to optimize agent behavior [1]. Use feedback mechanisms to regulate interactions (e.g., energy allocation) and maintain equilibrium.

## VII. CONCLUSION

The hybrid society of humans, robots, and AI agents is a complex adaptive system shaped by self-interest, collaboration, and evolution. Sociological theories structural functionalism, conflict theory, exchange theory, and constructivism combined with systems theory principles of openness, self-organization, complexity, holism, interconnectedness, hierarchy, dynamic equilibrium, and temporality, provide a robust framework to understand its structure and dynamics. Economic, psychological, ethical, and management science perspectives further enrich this framework, addressing resource constraints, AI behavior, moral obligations, and coordination challenges. By designing AI agents with adaptability, ethical alignment, collaborative competence, resilience, systemic awareness, psychological alignment, and management integration, we can ensure their integration into this society while addressing challenges like inequality, trust, and systemic fragility. These principles, grounded in multidisciplinary insights, offer a roadmap for building AI that fosters a harmonious, innovative, and resilient hybrid society, aligning with the systems-theoretic goal of optimizing complex systems for human needs.
REFERENCES

[1] L. von Bertalanffy, *General System Theory*. George Braziller, 1968.

[2] E. Durkheim, *The Division of Labor in Society*. Free Press, 1893.

[3] K. Marx, *Capital: A Critique of Political Economy*. Penguin Classics, 1867.

[4] G. C. Homans, *Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms*. Harcourt Brace, 1961.

[5] M. Weber, *Economy and Society*. University of California Press, 1922.

[6] H. Spencer, *The Principles of Sociology*. Appleton, 1876.

[7] P. M. Blau, *Exchange and Power in Social Life*. Wiley, 1964.

[8] G. Simmel, *Sociology*. Brill, 1908.

[9] X. S. Qian, *On Systems Engineering*. Hunan Science and Technology Press, 1980.

[10] S. Russell and P. Norvig, *Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach*. Pearson, 2021.

[11] A. Smith, *The Wealth of Nations*. W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1776.

[12] T. Piketty, *Capital in the Twenty-First Century*. Harvard University Press, 2014.

[13] A. H. Maslow, *Motivation and Personality*. Harper & Row, 1970.

[14] H. Tajfel, *Human Groups and Social Categories*. Cambridge University Press, 1981.

[15] I. Kant, *Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals*. Cambridge University Press, 1785.

[16] L. Floridi, *The Ethics of Information*. Oxford University Press, 2013.

[17] H. A. Simon, *Administrative Behavior*. Free Press, 1997.

[18] H. Mintzberg, *The Nature of Managerial Work*. Harper & Row, 1973.