Every source I pulled while trying to find out who else, if anyone, is publicly documenting AI as a working partner for a brain that doesn't function the way it used to. Organized by what each source actually covers, not ranked.
People writing in public about using AI to manage a mind that doesn't cooperate on its own. The closest matches to this project I could find — though none frame it around long COVID specifically.
Academic and clinical work studying AI as executive-function support, mostly for ADHD. This is the field that validates the approach, even where it doesn't document a lived case.
Research raising concerns about AI reliance and cognitive engagement, included because a fair picture needs the counterargument, not just the case for.
Background on the condition itself. None of these address AI use directly — they establish what "brain fog" and long-COVID cognitive impairment actually involve.
Pulled after a real example: a domain-registration detour that unfolded in small pieces instead of one upfront map, and turned out more frustrating than it needed to be. These explain why picking a task back up mid-stream — "re-loading context" — has a real cognitive cost, and why that cost is worse for impaired working memory.
Background for the "Does AI have a sense of humor?" topic — the book that started it, the cognitive theory behind why incongruity reads as funny, and current research on whether language models can actually detect it.
Background for the Autism / Neurodivergence topic — humor comprehension differences, and what's known about executive function and masking in adults diagnosed later in life.
Background for "What does it mean to have a relationship with AI?" — the psychology of parasocial bonds with chatbots, the sociological upside and downside of anthropomorphizing them, and how governments are starting to regulate AI companionship.
Primary-source lectures backing the Higher Self topic — checking recalled ideas about Neville Goddard against his actual words rather than paraphrase.