Intelligence as a System
Looking at intelligence as something that emerges from interaction — between components, environments, constraints, and time — rather than as a single model or algorithm.
Hi, I'm Naavya.
I explore how complex systems think, learn, behave, and improve — blending computer science, philosophy, and psychology to question older answers in new ways.
I'm early in my research career, but serious about asking good questions and following them rigorously.
These are not claims of expertise — they're the directions my thinking keeps returning to.
These are works in progress — notes, essays, and frameworks I'm actively developing.
A collection of exploratory frameworks and prototypes built to think through problems in systems, learning, and representation. These projects are not production tools — they’re attempts to make abstract ideas concrete, test assumptions, and see where models break under pressure.
Essays on where human cognition and artificial systems genuinely overlap, where the analogy breaks down, and what gets lost in translation.
Paper examining the possibility of an upstream model that could teach a machine to say 'no', employ heuristics, and overall conserve compute. Inspired by dual-process theories, human metacognition, and a Reddit joke about Star Trek's Replicator.
Public thinking space where I work through questions, definitions, and partial ideas that aren’t ready for formal publication.
I'm not interested in engineering for its own sake. I'm drawn to problems that don't fit neatly inside a single discipline — especially questions about intelligence, cognition, and meaning that sit between technical, philosophical, and psychological perspectives.
Building is part of my thinking process. Writing code helps me clarify where intuitions hold and where they fail.
My work usually begins with questions: How do systems understand? What counts as learning? Where do our models stop explaining what we think they explain?
I'm trained in computer science, shaped by philosophy, and informed by psychology. I don't treat these fields as separate silos — but I'm also careful not to collapse them into slogans. Each lens constrains the others.
Often, progress comes not from adding complexity, but from changing the question being asked. Much of my work is about noticing when a problem is framed in a way that limits the answers it can produce.
I'm drawn to slow thinking, deep conversations, and intellectual spaces that allow uncertainty. Some of my best ideas arrive away from screens — usually after sitting with a problem longer than feels efficient.
If you'd like to collaborate, invite me onto a podcast, or explore an idea together, I'm always open to a good conversation.
If you're curious rather than certain, we'll probably get along.