arXiv:2608. 05224v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models fine-tuned on human behavioural data have emerged as general-purpose cognitive proxies, but the scale this requires, and whether these models process task structure or exploit statistical shortcuts, remain open questions.
arXiv:2603.22161v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Metacognition -- assessing the quality of one's own cognitive performance -- guides adaptive behavior across species. Substantial research demonstr...
arXiv:2609.01170v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models exhibit a modular internal organization that mirrors well-studied functional networks of the human brain, but how this organizati...
arXiv:2606. 20205v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Psychological instruments designed for humans are increasingly used to assign large language models (LLMs) stable psychological profiles that affect their usability, safety assessment, and use as proxies for human participants in research.
arXiv:2608. 14681v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Words recur constantly in natural language use, yet it remains unclear whether language models reactivate prior representations or re-evaluate repeated words afresh, and whether post-training changes this default behavior.
arXiv:2608. 12377v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Brains and large language models (LLMs) are fundamentally different memory systems, but they can be compared through shared functional questions: where memory-related information is represented, how partial cues recover broader associations, how new information is written or updated, and how memory-related states can be perturbed.
arXiv:2607. 26845v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Inference-time thinking improves the performance of large language models, but aggregate outcomes do not reveal whether models use available evidence more effectively or seek information that could improve future decisions.
arXiv:2604. 09670v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Intelligent systems must maintain and manipulate task-relevant information online to adapt to dynamic environments and changing goals.
The paper introduces NeuroCognition, a benchmark based on three neuropsychological tests—Raven's Progressive Matrices, Spatial Working Memory, and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test—to evaluate foundational cognitive abilities in large language models (LLMs). It finds that while LLMs excel on text tasks, their performance drops on image-based and more complex tasks, and they fail different parts of the same tasks compared to humans. NeuroCognition correlates with standard general-capability benchmarks yet measures distinct cognitive skills, highlighting where LLMs align with or diverge from human-like intelligence.
Fine‑tuning reshapes internal representations of large language models, affecting attention patterns and layer‑wise activations. The study shows that components identified by EAP as important for task performance cluster in specific layers, yet these layers do not align with those undergoing the largest representational changes. Additionally, overlapping EAP components across different tasks do not guarantee cross‑task transfer and can even degrade performance when tasks differ in nature.
arXiv:2609.22215v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Knowledge distillation can transmit unintended behavioral traits from a teacher model to a student through training data that appear semantically unr...
arXiv:2603.17839v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Verbal confidence -- prompting LLMs to state their confidence as a number or category -- is widely used to extract uncertainty estimates from...
arXiv:2608. 08159v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly reported to exhibit human-like neural and cognitive signatures, including concept cells, mental number lines, and cognitive maps.