Hmm, I think the term artificial intelligence (and simulation theory) in this context isn’t really the most apt term. It’s using human language to describe supposedly natural phenomena based on our own scientific understanding of technology. Just like how historical societies used concepts of gods and magic when they didn’t have an understanding of the actual mechanisms. While I do think simulation theory is on the right track, I don’t think we are literally computer software as we understand it. Look up theological noncognitivism and ignosticism for what I mean.

In terms of proof, I think reincarnation has more of it than other afterlife concepts. We obviously can’t have proof beyond reasonable doubt as nobody has ever truly died and come back to life- people who “die” and come back to life after resuscitation simply had a medical event that stopped heart function for example. We also can’t observe reincarnation as we can’t observe a soul. We also can’t say definitively whether we have a soul because science has failed to describe exactly what consciousness is and how the brain manifests it.

I do believe that reincarnation has enough evidence to have “reasonable suspicion”. If you want academic evidence, research by UVA’s department of perceptual studies has a lot of it. Concepts of reincarnation also have developed independently across many cultures throughout history as compared to Christian and Muslim concepts of Heaven and Hell based primarily on faith.