mstyslavity/prisma_v3 huggingface dataset:
Current advances in AI and its applicability have highlighted the need to ensure its trustworthiness for legal, ethical, and even commercial reasons. Sub-symbolic machine learning algorithms, such as the LLMs, simulate reasoning but hallucinate and their decisions cannot be explained or audited (crucial aspects for trustworthiness). On the other hand, rule-based reasoners, such as Cyc, are able to provide the chain of reasoning steps but are complex and use a large number of reasoners. We propose a middle ground using s(CASP), a goal-directed constraint-based answer set programming reasoner that employs a small number of mechanisms to emulate reliable and explainable human-style commonsense reasoning. In this paper, we explain how s(CASP) supports the 16 desiderata for trustworthy AI introduced by Doug Lenat and Gary Marcus (2023), and two additional ones: inconsistency detection and the assumption of alternative worlds. To illustrate the feasibility and synergies of s(CASP), we present a range of diverse applications, including a conversational chatbot and a virtually embodied reasoner.
The concept bottleneck model (CBM), as a technique improving interpretability via linking predictions to human-understandable concepts, makes high-risk and life-critical medical image classification credible. Typically, existing CBM methods associate the final layer of visual encoders with concepts to explain the model's predictions. However, we empirically discover the phenomenon of concept preference variation, that is, the concepts are preferably associated with the features at different layers than those only at the final layer; yet a blind last-layer-based association neglects such a preference variation and thus weakens the accurate correspondences between features and concepts, impairing model interpretability. To address this issue, we propose a novel Multi-layer Visual Preference-enhanced Concept Bottleneck Model (MVP-CBM), which comprises two key novel modules: (1) intra-layer concept preference modeling, which captures the preferred association of different concepts with features at various visual layers, and (2) multi-layer concept sparse activation fusion, which sparsely aggregates concept activations from multiple layers to enhance performance. Thus, by explicitly modeling concept preferences, MVP-CBM can comprehensively leverage multi-layer visual information to provide a more nuanced and accurate explanation of model decisions. Extensive experiments on several public medical classification benchmarks demonstrate that MVP-CBM achieves state-of-the-art accuracy and interoperability, verifying its superiority. Code is available at https://github.com/wcj6/MVP-CBM.
In social psychology and cognitive science, there has been much interest in studying category stereotypes. However, we still lack a consensual mathematical definition or framework, which is necessary for us to hold a deeper understanding of stereotypes in human cognition. In this paper, we use graph theory to portray category stereotypes in human cognition, based on pairs of labels having special relations. By using methods and conclusions in graph theory (including algebraic graph theory and vertex coloring) as well as strict ratiocination, we give criteria for judging the stability of a given stereotype, some of which are computationally practicable. We also define the chromatic stability index (CSI) to measure the stability of a stereotype in human cognition, as well as to provide its precise range. From the perspective of stereotype graphs and CSI, we may explain why stereotypes can easily stay in human cognition.
The multifaceted nature of subjective experience poses a challenge to the study of consciousness. Traditional neuroscientific approaches often concentrate on isolated facets, such as perceptual awareness or the global state of consciousness and construct a theory around the relevant empirical paradigms and findings. Theories of consciousness are, therefore, often difficult to compare; indeed, there might be little overlap in the phenomena such theories aim to explain. Here, we take a different approach: starting with active inference, a first principles framework for modelling behaviour as (approximate) Bayesian inference, and building up to a minimal theory of consciousness, which emerges from the shared features of computational models derived under active inference. We review a body of work applying active inference models to the study of consciousness and argue that there is implicit in all these models a small set of theoretical commitments that point to a minimal (and testable) theory of consciousness.
We explore the role of ontologies in enhancing hybrid modeling and simulation through improved semantic rigor, model reusability, and interoperability across systems, disciplines, and tools. By distinguishing between methodological and referential ontologies, we demonstrate how these complementary approaches address interoperability challenges along three axes: Human-Human, Human-Machine, and Machine-Machine. Techniques such as competency questions, ontology design patterns, and layered strategies are highlighted for promoting shared understanding and formal precision. Integrating ontologies with Semantic Web Technologies, we showcase their dual role as descriptive domain representations and prescriptive guides for simulation construction. Four application cases - sea-level rise analysis, Industry 4.0 modeling, artificial societies for policy support, and cyber threat evaluation - illustrate the practical benefits of ontology-driven hybrid simulation workflows. We conclude by discussing challenges and opportunities in ontology-based hybrid M&S, including tool integration, semantic alignment, and support for explainable AI.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly embedded in critical decision-making systems, however their foundational ``black-box'' models require eXplainable AI (XAI) solutions to enhance transparency, which are mostly oriented to experts, making no sense to non-experts. Alarming evidence about AI's unprecedented human values risks brings forward the imperative need for transparent human-centered XAI solutions. In this work, we introduce a domain-, model-, explanation-agnostic, generalizable and reproducible framework that ensures both transparency and human-centered explanations tailored to the needs of both experts and non-experts. The framework leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) and employs in-context learning to convey domain- and explainability-relevant contextual knowledge into LLMs. Through its structured prompt and system setting, our framework encapsulates in one response explanations understandable by non-experts and technical information to experts, all grounded in domain and explainability principles. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework, we establish a ground-truth contextual ``thesaurus'' through a rigorous benchmarking with over 40 data, model, and XAI combinations for an explainable clustering analysis of a well-being scenario. Through a comprehensive quality and human-friendliness evaluation of our framework's explanations, we prove high content quality through strong correlations with ground-truth explanations (Spearman rank correlation=0.92) and improved interpretability and human-friendliness to non-experts through a user study (N=56). Our overall evaluation confirms trust in LLMs as HCXAI enablers, as our framework bridges the above Gaps by delivering (i) high-quality technical explanations aligned with foundational XAI methods and (ii) clear, efficient, and interpretable human-centered explanations for non-experts.
Interpreting large volumes of high-dimensional, unlabeled data in a manner that is comprehensible to humans remains a significant challenge across various domains. In unsupervised healthcare data analysis, interpreting clustered data can offer meaningful insights into patients' health outcomes, which hold direct implications for healthcare providers. This paper addresses the problem of interpreting clustered sensor data collected from older adult patients recovering from lower-limb fractures in the community. A total of 560 days of multimodal sensor data, including acceleration, step count, ambient motion, GPS location, heart rate, and sleep, alongside clinical scores, were remotely collected from patients at home. Clustering was first carried out separately for each data modality to assess the impact of feature sets extracted from each modality on patients' recovery trajectories. Then, using context-aware prompting, a large language model was employed to infer meaningful cluster labels for the clusters derived from each modality. The quality of these clusters and their corresponding labels was validated through rigorous statistical testing and visualization against clinical scores collected alongside the multimodal sensor data. The results demonstrated the statistical significance of most modality-specific cluster labels generated by the large language model with respect to clinical scores, confirming the efficacy of the proposed method for interpreting sensor data in an unsupervised manner. This unsupervised data analysis approach, relying solely on sensor data, enables clinicians to identify at-risk patients and take timely measures to improve health outcomes.
The era of Large Language Models (LLMs) presents a new opportunity for interpretability--agentic interpretability: a multi-turn conversation with an LLM wherein the LLM proactively assists human understanding by developing and leveraging a mental model of the user, which in turn enables humans to develop better mental models of the LLM. Such conversation is a new capability that traditional `inspective' interpretability methods (opening the black-box) do not use. Having a language model that aims to teach and explain--beyond just knowing how to talk--is similar to a teacher whose goal is to teach well, understanding that their success will be measured by the student's comprehension. While agentic interpretability may trade off completeness for interactivity, making it less suitable for high-stakes safety situations with potentially deceptive models, it leverages a cooperative model to discover potentially superhuman concepts that can improve humans' mental model of machines. Agentic interpretability introduces challenges, particularly in evaluation, due to what we call `human-entangled-in-the-loop' nature (humans responses are integral part of the algorithm), making the design and evaluation difficult. We discuss possible solutions and proxy goals. As LLMs approach human parity in many tasks, agentic interpretability's promise is to help humans learn the potentially superhuman concepts of the LLMs, rather than see us fall increasingly far from understanding them.
The proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) in high-stakes applications such as medical (self-)diagnosis and preliminary triage raises significant ethical and practical concerns about the effectiveness, appropriateness, and possible harmfulness of the use of these technologies for health-related concerns and queries. Some prior work has considered the effectiveness of LLMs in answering expert-written health queries/prompts, questions from medical examination banks, or queries based on pre-existing clinical cases. Unfortunately, these existing studies completely ignore an in-the-wild evaluation of the effectiveness of LLMs in answering everyday health concerns and queries typically asked by general users, which corresponds to the more prevalent use case for LLMs. To address this research gap, this paper presents the findings from a university-level competition that leveraged a novel, crowdsourced approach for evaluating the effectiveness of LLMs in answering everyday health queries. Over the course of a week, a total of 34 participants prompted four publicly accessible LLMs with 212 real (or imagined) health concerns, and the LLM generated responses were evaluated by a team of nine board-certified physicians. At a high level, our findings indicate that on average, 76% of the 212 LLM responses were deemed to be accurate by physicians. Further, with the help of medical professionals, we investigated whether RAG versions of these LLMs (powered with a comprehensive medical knowledge base) can improve the quality of responses generated by LLMs. Finally, we also derive qualitative insights to explain our quantitative findings by conducting interviews with seven medical professionals who were shown all the prompts in our competition. This paper aims to provide a more grounded understanding of how LLMs perform in real-world everyday health communication.
Many programs evaluated in observational studies incorporate a sequential structure, where individuals may be assigned to various programs over time. While this complexity is often simplified by analyzing programs at single points in time, this paper reviews, explains, and applies methods for program evaluation within a sequential framework. It outlines the assumptions required for identification under dynamic confounding and demonstrates how extending sequential estimands to dynamic policies enables the construction of more realistic counterfactuals. Furthermore, the paper explores recently developed methods for estimating effects across multiple treatments and time periods, utilizing Double Machine Learning (DML), a flexible estimator that avoids parametric assumptions while preserving desirable statistical properties. Using Swiss administrative data, the methods are demonstrated through an empirical application assessing the participation of unemployed individuals in active labor market policies, where assignment decisions by caseworkers can be reconsidered between two periods. The analysis identifies a temporary wage subsidy as the most effective intervention, on average, even after adjusting for its extended duration compared to other programs. Overall, DML-based analysis of dynamic policies proves to be a useful approach within the program evaluation toolkit.
Recent advances in Large Language Models have demonstrated their capabilities across a variety of tasks. However, automatically extracting implicit knowledge from natural language remains a significant challenge, as machines lack active experience with the physical world. Given this scenario, semantic knowledge graphs can serve as conceptual spaces that guide the automated text generation reasoning process to achieve more efficient and explainable results. In this paper, we apply a logic-augmented generation (LAG) framework that leverages the explicit representation of a text through a semantic knowledge graph and applies it in combination with prompt heuristics to elicit implicit analogical connections. This method generates extended knowledge graph triples representing implicit meaning, enabling systems to reason on unlabeled multimodal data regardless of the domain. We validate our work through three metaphor detection and understanding tasks across four datasets, as they require deep analogical reasoning capabilities. The results show that this integrated approach surpasses current baselines, performs better than humans in understanding visual metaphors, and enables more explainable reasoning processes, though still has inherent limitations in metaphor understanding, especially for domain-specific metaphors. Furthermore, we propose a thorough error analysis, discussing issues with metaphorical annotations and current evaluation methods.
This study explores human action recognition using a three-class subset of the COCO image corpus, benchmarking models from simple fully connected networks to transformer architectures. The binary Vision Transformer (ViT) achieved 90% mean test accuracy, significantly exceeding multiclass classifiers such as convolutional networks (approximately 35%) and CLIP-based models (approximately 62-64%). A one-way ANOVA (F = 61.37, p < 0.001) confirmed these differences are statistically significant. Qualitative analysis with SHAP explainer and LeGrad heatmaps indicated that the ViT localizes pose-specific regions (e.g., lower limbs for walking or running), while simpler feed-forward models often focus on background textures, explaining their errors. These findings emphasize the data efficiency of transformer representations and the importance of explainability techniques in diagnosing class-specific failures.
We give further evidence that the matrix-tensor model studied in \cite{belin2023} is dual to AdS$_{3}$ gravity including the sum over topologies. This provides a 3D version of the duality between JT gravity and an ensemble of random Hamiltonians, in which the matrix and tensor provide random CFT$_2$ data subject to a potential that incorporates the bootstrap constraints. We show how the Feynman rules of the ensemble produce a sum over all three-manifolds and how surgery is implemented by the matrix integral. The partition functions of the resulting 3d gravity theory agree with Virasoro TQFT (VTQFT) on a fixed, hyperbolic manifold. However, on non-hyperbolic geometries, our 3d gravity theory differs from VTQFT, leading to a difference in the eigenvalue statistics of the associated ensemble. As explained in \cite{belin2023}, the Schwinger-Dyson (SD) equations of the matrix-tensor integral play a crucial role in understanding how gravity emerges in the limit that the ensemble localizes to exact CFT's. We show how the SD equations can be translated into a combinatorial problem about three-manifolds.
Background and Objective: Prototype-based methods improve interpretability by learning fine-grained part-prototypes; however, their visualization in the input pixel space is not always consistent with human-understandable biomarkers. In addition, well-known prototype-based approaches typically learn extremely granular prototypes that are less interpretable in medical imaging, where both the presence and extent of biomarkers and lesions are critical. Methods: To address these challenges, we propose PiPViT (Patch-based Visual Interpretable Prototypes), an inherently interpretable prototypical model for image recognition. Leveraging a vision transformer (ViT), PiPViT captures long-range dependencies among patches to learn robust, human-interpretable prototypes that approximate lesion extent only using image-level labels. Additionally, PiPViT benefits from contrastive learning and multi-resolution input processing, which enables effective localization of biomarkers across scales. Results: We evaluated PiPViT on retinal OCT image classification across four datasets, where it achieved competitive quantitative performance compared to state-of-the-art methods while delivering more meaningful explanations. Moreover, quantitative evaluation on a hold-out test set confirms that the learned prototypes are semantically and clinically relevant. We believe PiPViT can transparently explain its decisions and assist clinicians in understanding diagnostic outcomes. Github page: https://github.com/marziehoghbaie/PiPViT
Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) are critical for threat detection and response, marking malicious activity across networks and systems. Yet, the effectiveness of automated IoC extraction systems is fundamentally limited by one key issue: the lack of high-quality ground truth. Current extraction tools rely either on manually extracted ground truth, which is labor-intensive and costly, or on automated ground truth creation methods that include non-malicious artifacts, leading to inflated false positive (FP) rates and unreliable threat intelligence. In this work, we analyze the shortcomings of existing ground truth creation strategies and address them by introducing the first hybrid human-in-the-loop pipeline for IoC extraction, which combines a large language model-based classifier (LANCE) with expert analyst validation. Our system improves precision through explainable, context-aware labeling and reduces analysts' work factor by 43% compared to manual annotation, as demonstrated in our evaluation with six analysts. Using this approach, we produce PRISM, a high-quality, publicly available benchmark of 1,791 labeled IoCs from 50 real-world threat reports. PRISM supports both fair evaluation and training of IoC extraction methods and enables reproducible research grounded in expert-validated indicators.
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into social science research practices raises significant technological, methodological, and ethical issues. We present a community-centric study drawing on 284 survey responses and 15 semi-structured interviews with social scientists, describing their familiarity with, perceptions of the usefulness of, and ethical concerns about the use of AI in their field. A crucial innovation in study design is to split our survey sample in half, providing the same questions to each -- but randomizing whether participants were asked about "AI" or "Machine Learning" (ML). We find that the use of AI in research settings has increased significantly among social scientists in step with the widespread popularity of generative AI (genAI). These tools have been used for a range of tasks, from summarizing literature reviews to drafting research papers. Some respondents used these tools out of curiosity but were dissatisfied with the results, while others have now integrated them into their typical workflows. Participants, however, also reported concerns with the use of AI in research contexts. This is a departure from more traditional ML algorithms which they view as statistically grounded. Participants express greater trust in ML, citing its relative transparency compared to black-box genAI systems. Ethical concerns, particularly around automation bias, deskilling, research misconduct, complex interpretability, and representational harm, are raised in relation to genAI. To guide this transition, we offer recommendations for AI developers, researchers, educators, and policymakers focusing on explainability, transparency, ethical safeguards, sustainability, and the integration of lived experiences into AI design and evaluation processes.
A central goal for mechanistic interpretability has been to identify the right units of analysis in large language models (LLMs) that causally explain their outputs. While early work focused on individual neurons, evidence that neurons often encode multiple concepts has motivated a shift toward analyzing directions in activation space. A key question is how to find directions that capture interpretable features in an unsupervised manner. Current methods rely on dictionary learning with sparse autoencoders (SAEs), commonly trained over residual stream activations to learn directions from scratch. However, SAEs often struggle in causal evaluations and lack intrinsic interpretability, as their learning is not explicitly tied to the computations of the model. Here, we tackle these limitations by directly decomposing MLP activations with semi-nonnegative matrix factorization (SNMF), such that the learned features are (a) sparse linear combinations of co-activated neurons, and (b) mapped to their activating inputs, making them directly interpretable. Experiments on Llama 3.1, Gemma 2 and GPT-2 show that SNMF derived features outperform SAEs and a strong supervised baseline (difference-in-means) on causal steering, while aligning with human-interpretable concepts. Further analysis reveals that specific neuron combinations are reused across semantically-related features, exposing a hierarchical structure in the MLP's activation space. Together, these results position SNMF as a simple and effective tool for identifying interpretable features and dissecting concept representations in LLMs.