mstyslavity/prisma_v3 huggingface dataset:
We prove a fundamental impossibility theorem: neural networks cannot simultaneously learn well-calibrated confidence estimates with meaningful diversity when trained using binary correct/incorrect supervision. Through rigorous mathematical analysis and comprehensive empirical evaluation spanning negative reward training, symmetric loss functions, and post-hoc calibration methods, we demonstrate this is an information-theoretic constraint, not a methodological failure. Our experiments reveal universal failure patterns: negative rewards produce extreme underconfidence (ECE greater than 0.8) while destroying confidence diversity (std less than 0.05), symmetric losses fail to escape binary signal averaging, and post-hoc methods achieve calibration (ECE less than 0.02) only by compressing the confidence distribution. We formalize this as an underspecified mapping problem where binary signals cannot distinguish between different confidence levels for correct predictions: a 60 percent confident correct answer receives identical supervision to a 90 percent confident one. Crucially, our real-world validation shows 100 percent failure rate for all training methods across MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, and CIFAR-10, while post-hoc calibration's 33 percent success rate paradoxically confirms our theorem by achieving calibration through transformation rather than learning. This impossibility directly explains neural network hallucinations and establishes why post-hoc calibration is mathematically necessary, not merely convenient. We propose novel supervision paradigms using ensemble disagreement and adaptive multi-agent learning that could overcome these fundamental limitations without requiring human confidence annotations.
Large language models (LLMs) can lead to undesired consequences when misaligned with human values, especially in scenarios involving complex and sensitive social biases. Previous studies have revealed the misalignment of LLMs with human values using expert-designed or agent-based emulated bias scenarios. However, it remains unclear whether the alignment of LLMs with human values differs across different types of scenarios (e.g., scenarios containing negative vs. non-negative questions). In this study, we investigate the alignment of LLMs with human values regarding social biases (HVSB) in different types of bias scenarios. Through extensive analysis of 12 LLMs from four model families and four datasets, we demonstrate that LLMs with large model parameter scales do not necessarily have lower misalignment rate and attack success rate. Moreover, LLMs show a certain degree of alignment preference for specific types of scenarios and the LLMs from the same model family tend to have higher judgment consistency. In addition, we study the understanding capacity of LLMs with their explanations of HVSB. We find no significant differences in the understanding of HVSB across LLMs. We also find LLMs prefer their own generated explanations. Additionally, we endow smaller language models (LMs) with the ability to explain HVSB. The generation results show that the explanations generated by the fine-tuned smaller LMs are more readable, but have a relatively lower model agreeability.
DNN-based language models excel across various NLP tasks but remain highly vulnerable to textual adversarial attacks. While adversarial text generation is crucial for NLP security, explainability, evaluation, and data augmentation, related work remains overwhelmingly English-centric, leaving the problem of constructing high-quality and sustainable adversarial robustness benchmarks for lower-resourced languages both difficult and understudied. First, method customization for lower-resourced languages is complicated due to linguistic differences and limited resources. Second, automated attacks are prone to generating invalid or ambiguous adversarial texts. Last but not least, language models continuously evolve and may be immune to parts of previously generated adversarial texts. To address these challenges, we introduce HITL-GAT, an interactive system based on a general approach to human-in-the-loop generation of adversarial texts. Additionally, we demonstrate the utility of HITL-GAT through a case study on Tibetan script, employing three customized adversarial text generation methods and establishing its first adversarial robustness benchmark, providing a valuable reference for other lower-resourced languages.
Comparing information structures in between deep neural networks (DNNs) and the human brain has become a key method for exploring their similarities and differences. Recent research has shown better alignment of vision-language DNN models, such as CLIP, with the activity of the human ventral occipitotemporal cortex (VOTC) than earlier vision models, supporting the idea that language modulates human visual perception. However, interpreting the results from such comparisons is inherently limited due to the "black box" nature of DNNs. To address this, we combined model-brain fitness analyses with human brain lesion data to examine how disrupting the communication pathway between the visual and language systems causally affects the ability of vision-language DNNs to explain the activity of the VOTC. Across four diverse datasets, CLIP consistently captured unique variance in VOTC neural representations, relative to both label-supervised (ResNet) and unsupervised (MoCo) models. This advantage tended to be left-lateralized at the group level, aligning with the human language network. Analyses of 33 stroke patients revealed that reduced white matter integrity between the VOTC and the language region in the left angular gyrus was correlated with decreased CLIP-brain correspondence and increased MoCo-brain correspondence, indicating a dynamic influence of language processing on the activity of the VOTC. These findings support the integration of language modulation in neurocognitive models of human vision, reinforcing concepts from vision-language DNN models. The sensitivity of model-brain similarity to specific brain lesions demonstrates that leveraging manipulation of the human brain is a promising framework for evaluating and developing brain-like computer models.
Generating regulatorily compliant Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) remains a high-cost, low-scalability bottleneck in Anti-Money Laundering (AML) workflows. While large language models (LLMs) offer promising fluency, they suffer from factual hallucination, limited crime typology alignment, and poor explainability -- posing unacceptable risks in compliance-critical domains. This paper introduces Co-Investigator AI, an agentic framework optimized to produce Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) significantly faster and with greater accuracy than traditional methods. Drawing inspiration from recent advances in autonomous agent architectures, such as the AI Co-Scientist, our approach integrates specialized agents for planning, crime type detection, external intelligence gathering, and compliance validation. The system features dynamic memory management, an AI-Privacy Guard layer for sensitive data handling, and a real-time validation agent employing the Agent-as-a-Judge paradigm to ensure continuous narrative quality assurance. Human investigators remain firmly in the loop, empowered to review and refine drafts in a collaborative workflow that blends AI efficiency with domain expertise. We demonstrate the versatility of Co-Investigator AI across a range of complex financial crime scenarios, highlighting its ability to streamline SAR drafting, align narratives with regulatory expectations, and enable compliance teams to focus on higher-order analytical work. This approach marks the beginning of a new era in compliance reporting -- bringing the transformative benefits of AI agents to the core of regulatory processes and paving the way for scalable, reliable, and transparent SAR generation.
Scientific claim verification against tables typically requires predicting whether a claim is supported or refuted given a table. However, we argue that predicting the final label alone is insufficient: it reveals little about the model's reasoning and offers limited interpretability. To address this, we reframe table-text alignment as an explanation task, requiring models to identify the table cells essential for claim verification. We build a new dataset by extending the SciTab benchmark with human-annotated cell-level rationales. 20 Annotators verify the claim label and highlight the minimal set of cells needed to support their decision. After the annotation process, we utilize the collected information and propose a taxonomy for handling ambiguous cases. Our experiments show that (i) incorporating table alignment information improves claim verification performance, and (ii) most LLMs, while often predicting correct labels, fail to recover human-aligned rationales, suggesting that their predictions do not stem from faithful reasoning.
Chemists in search of structure-property relationships face great challenges due to limited high quality, concordant datasets. Machine learning (ML) has significantly advanced predictive capabilities in chemical sciences, but these modern data-driven approaches have increased the demand for data. In response to the growing demand for explainable AI (XAI) and to bridge the gap between predictive accuracy and human comprehensibility, we introduce LAMeL - a Linear Algorithm for Meta-Learning that preserves interpretability while improving the prediction accuracy across multiple properties. While most approaches treat each chemical prediction task in isolation, LAMeL leverages a meta-learning framework to identify shared model parameters across related tasks, even if those tasks do not share data, allowing it to learn a common functional manifold that serves as a more informed starting point for new unseen tasks. Our method delivers performance improvements ranging from 1.1- to 25-fold over standard ridge regression, depending on the domain of the dataset. While the degree of performance enhancement varies across tasks, LAMeL consistently outperforms or matches traditional linear methods, making it a reliable tool for chemical property prediction where both accuracy and interpretability are critical.
AI-readiness describes the degree to which data may be optimally and ethically used for subsequent AI and Machine Learning (AI/ML) methods, where those methods may involve some combination of model training, data classification, and ethical, explainable prediction. The Bridge2AI consortium has defined the particular criteria a biomedical dataset may possess to render it AI-ready: in brief, a dataset's readiness is related to its FAIRness, provenance, degree of characterization, explainability, sustainability, and computability, in addition to its accompaniment with documentation about ethical data practices. To ensure AI-readiness and to clarify data structure and relationships within Bridge2AI's Grand Challenges (GCs), particular types of metadata are necessary. The GCs within the Bridge2AI initiative include four data-generating projects focusing on generating AI/ML-ready datasets to tackle complex biomedical and behavioral research problems. These projects develop standardized, multimodal data, tools, and training resources to support AI integration, while addressing ethical data practices. Examples include using voice as a biomarker, building interpretable genomic tools, modeling disease trajectories with diverse multimodal data, and mapping cellular and molecular health indicators across the human body. This report assesses the state of metadata creation and standardization in the Bridge2AI GCs, provides guidelines where required, and identifies gaps and areas for improvement across the program. New projects, including those outside the Bridge2AI consortium, would benefit from what we have learned about creating metadata as part of efforts to promote AI readiness.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performances in complex text generation tasks. However, the contribution of the input prompt to the generated content still remains obscure to humans, underscoring the necessity of understanding the causality between input and output pairs. Existing works for providing prompt-specific explanation often confine model output to be classification or next-word prediction. Few initial attempts aiming to explain the entire language generation often treat input prompt texts independently, ignoring their combinatorial effects on the follow-up generation. In this study, we introduce a counterfactual explanation framework based on Joint Prompt Attribution, JoPA, which aims to explain how a few prompt texts collaboratively influences the LLM's complete generation. Particularly, we formulate the task of prompt attribution for generation interpretation as a combinatorial optimization problem, and introduce a probabilistic algorithm to search for the casual input combination in the discrete space. We define and utilize multiple metrics to evaluate the produced explanations, demonstrating both the faithfulness and efficiency of our framework.
Shapes of cognition is a new conceptual paradigm for the computational cognitive modeling of Language-Endowed Intelligent Agents (LEIAs). Shapes are remembered constellations of sensory, linguistic, conceptual, episodic, and procedural knowledge that allow agents to cut through the complexity of real life the same way as people do: by expecting things to be typical, recognizing patterns, acting by habit, reasoning by analogy, satisficing, and generally minimizing cognitive load to the degree situations permit. Atypical outcomes are treated using shapes-based recovery methods, such as learning on the fly, asking a human partner for help, or seeking an actionable, even if imperfect, situational understanding. Although shapes is an umbrella term, it is not vague: shapes-based modeling involves particular objectives, hypotheses, modeling strategies, knowledge bases, and actual models of wide-ranging phenomena, all implemented within a particular cognitive architecture. Such specificity is needed both to vet our hypotheses and to achieve our practical aims of building useful agent systems that are explainable, extensible, and worthy of our trust, even in critical domains. However, although the LEIA example of shapes-based modeling is specific, the principles can be applied more broadly, giving new life to knowledge-based and hybrid AI.
This paper introduces HARMONIC, a cognitive-robotic architecture designed for robots in human-robotic teams. HARMONIC supports semantic perception interpretation, human-like decision-making, and intentional language communication. It addresses the issues of safety and quality of results; aims to solve problems of data scarcity, explainability, and safety; and promotes transparency and trust. Two proof-of-concept HARMONIC-based robotic systems are demonstrated, each implemented in both a high-fidelity simulation environment and on physical robotic platforms.
Agentic workflows promise efficiency, but adoption hinges on whether people actually trust systems that act on their behalf. We present DoubleAgents, an agentic planning tool that embeds transparency and control through user intervention, value-reflecting policies, rich state visualizations, and uncertainty flagging for human coordination tasks. A built-in respondent simulation generates realistic scenarios, allowing users to rehearse, refine policies, and calibrate their reliance before live use. We evaluate DoubleAgents in a two-day lab study (n=10), two deployments (n=2), and a technical evaluation. Results show that participants initially hesitated to delegate but grew more reliant as they experienced transparency, control, and adaptive learning during simulated cases. Deployment results demonstrate DoubleAgents' real-world relevance and usefulness, showing that the effort required scaled appropriately with task complexity and contextual data. We contribute trust-by-design patterns and mechanisms for proactive AI -- consistency, controllability, and explainability -- along with simulation as a safe path to build and calibrate trust over time.
Concept-based interpretability for Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) aims to align internal model representations with high-level semantic concepts, but existing approaches largely overlook the semantic roles of individual filters and the dynamic propagation of concepts across layers. To address these limitations, we propose ConceptFlow, a concept-based interpretability framework that simulates the internal "thinking path" of a model by tracing how concepts emerge and evolve across layers. ConceptFlow comprises two key components: (i) concept attentions, which associate each filter with relevant high-level concepts to enable localized semantic interpretation, and (ii) conceptual pathways, derived from a concept transition matrix that quantifies how concepts propagate and transform between filters. Together, these components offer a unified and structured view of internal model reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that ConceptFlow yields semantically meaningful insights into model reasoning, validating the effectiveness of concept attentions and conceptual pathways in explaining decision behavior. By modeling hierarchical conceptual pathways, ConceptFlow provides deeper insight into the internal logic of CNNs and supports the generation of more faithful and human-aligned explanations.
Since the earliest proposals for artificial neural network (ANN) models of the mind and brain, critics have pointed out key weaknesses in these models compared to human cognitive abilities. Here we review recent work that uses metalearning to overcome several classic challenges, which we characterize as addressing the Problem of Incentive and Practice -- that is, providing machines with both incentives to improve specific skills and opportunities to practice those skills. This explicit optimization contrasts with more conventional approaches that hope the desired behaviour will emerge through optimizing related but different objectives. We review applications of this principle to addressing four classic challenges for ANNs: systematic generalization, catastrophic forgetting, few-shot learning and multi-step reasoning. We also discuss how large language models incorporate key aspects of this metalearning framework (namely, sequence prediction with feedback trained on diverse data), which helps to explain some of their successes on these classic challenges. Finally, we discuss the prospects for understanding aspects of human development through this framework, and whether natural environments provide the right incentives and practice for learning how to make challenging generalizations.
Enormous attention and resources are being devoted to the quest for artificial general intelligence and, even more ambitiously, artificial superintelligence. We wonder about the implications for our methodological research, which aims to help decision makers cope with what econometricians call identification problems, inferential problems in empirical research that do not diminish as sample size grows. Of particular concern are missing data problems in prediction and treatment choice. Essentially all data collection intended to inform decision making is subject to missing data, which gives rise to identification problems. Thus far, we see no indication that the current dominant architecture of machine learning (ML)-based artificial intelligence (AI) systems will outperform humans in this context. In this paper, we explain why we have reached this conclusion and why we see the missing data problem as a cautionary case study in the quest for superintelligence more generally. We first discuss the concept of intelligence, before presenting a decision-theoretic perspective that formalizes the connection between intelligence and identification problems. We next apply this perspective to two leading cases of missing data problems. Then we explain why we are skeptical that AI research is currently on a path toward machines doing better than humans at solving these identification problems.
This research is part of a study of a real-time, cloud-based on-street parking service using crowd-sourced in-vehicle fleet data. The service provides real-time information about available parking spots by classifying crowd-sourced detections observed via ultrasonic sensors. The goal of this research is to optimize the current parking service quality by analyzing the automation of the existing test process for ground truth tests. Therefore, methods from the field of machine learning, especially image pattern recognition, are applied to enrich the database and substitute human engineering work in major areas of the analysis process. After an introduction into the related areas of machine learning, this paper explains the methods and implementations made to achieve a high level of automation, applying convolutional neural networks. Finally, predefined metrics present the performance level achieved, showing a time reduction of human resources up to 99.58 %. The overall improvements are discussed, summarized, and followed by an outlook for future development and potential application of the analysis automation tool.
In high-stakes disaster scenarios, timely and informed decision-making is critical yet often challenged by uncertainty, dynamic environments, and limited resources. This paper presents a systematic review of Human-AI collaboration patterns that support decision-making across all disaster management phases. Drawing from 51 peer-reviewed studies, we identify four major categories: Human-AI Decision Support Systems, Task and Resource Coordination, Trust and Transparency, and Simulation and Training. Within these, we analyze sub-patterns such as cognitive-augmented intelligence, multi-agent coordination, explainable AI, and virtual training environments. Our review highlights how AI systems may enhance situational awareness, improves response efficiency, and support complex decision-making, while also surfacing critical limitations in scalability, interpretability, and system interoperability. We conclude by outlining key challenges and future research directions, emphasizing the need for adaptive, trustworthy, and context-aware Human-AI systems to improve disaster resilience and equitable recovery outcomes.
Subjective teacher evaluations play a key role in shaping students' educational trajectories. Previous studies have shown that students of low socioeconomic status (SES) receive worse subjective evaluations than their high SES peers, even when they score similarly on objective standardized tests. This is often interpreted as evidence of teacher bias. Measurement error in test scores challenges this interpretation. We discuss how both classical and non-classical measurement error in test scores generate a biased coefficient of the conditional SES gap, and consider three empirical strategies to address this bias. Using administrative data from the Netherlands, where secondary school track recommendations are pivotal teacher judgments, we find that measurement error explains 35 to 43% of the conditional SES gap in track recommendations.