I call this "machine metaphysics" and I think it's an extremely interesting area of speculation. A whole lot of human metaphysics are based on our (very limited) sensory inputs – which machines/AI have infinitely more of.
As a quick example, it seems to me that an AI may not need the concept of a universal, in the philosophical sense, because it is capable of handling a near-infinite number of particulars.
Unfortunately I haven't come across much writing of this sort, as most of the philosophical writing about AI centers on the reverse topic: how humans will be changed by machines.
I had in mind more concrete aspects of "human" reality. A lot of the divisions we make between objects seem dependent on our language, which is dependent on our sensory abilities.
The concept of species is maybe a good example – it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, if you think about it. It's merely a linguistic placeholder to describe a step in a process, because the idea of constant evolutionary change is too difficult to encapsulate in a single concept. An AI would have no issue with this, as it is capable of taking in and holding much more data and conceptualizing the concept of a process.
As a quick example, it seems to me that an AI may not need the concept of a universal, in the philosophical sense, because it is capable of handling a near-infinite number of particulars.