arXiv:2607. 01433v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Divergent thinking is a crucial aspect of creativity, yet large language models (LLMs) tend to consistently generate similar responses to open-ended questions, in what has been termed the artificial hivemind effect.
By Samuel Schapiro, Core Francisco Park, Felix Sosa, Lav R. Varshney
The study investigates whether language models tailored to specific cognitive domains better align with corresponding brain systems. By prompting and fine‑tuning large language models into six domain experts—sensory, spatial, numerical, reasoning, social, and abstract—the authors find that each expert’s representations more closely match the brain region associated with its domain than other experts. This domain‑specific alignment holds across multiple base models and fMRI datasets, while overall prediction accuracy remains largely unchanged, indicating that regional alignment can be obscured when summarizing across the brain.
By Zhivar Sourati, Mengxuan Helen Wu, Nona Ghazizadeh, Jonas Kaplan, Morteza Dehghani, Samuel A. Nastase
arXiv:2510.01030v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: The human ability to translate diverse perceptual and linguistic inputs into structured behavior has been thought to rest on learning robust repres...
By Zach Studdiford, Timothy T. Rogers, Kushin Mukherjee, Siddharth Suresh
arXiv:2606. 11893v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The correspondence between large language models (LLMs) and the neural mechanisms underlying human higher-order cognition remains insufficiently characterized.
By Mingqing Xiao, Kai Du, Zhouchen Lin
arXiv:2502. 14671v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) representations are known to align with brain activity during language processing, but it remains unclear what drives this alignment.
By Maryam Rahimi, Mohammad Reza Daliri, Yadollah Yaghoobzadeh
The study examined whether brain-language model alignment reflects shared computational mechanisms or merely stable lexical‑semantic correspondences. Using whole‑brain encoding across Mandarin, English, and French, transformer representations predicted activity in a distributed network that overlapped across languages and remained stable across layers. Contextual embeddings and measures of prediction or compression did not outperform static lexical embeddings, suggesting that alignment is robust but not informative about shared computational processes.
By Ni Yang, Rui He, Philipp Homan, Iris Sommer, Davide Staub, Wolfram Hinzen
arXiv:2510. 20091v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Creativity is often seen as a hallmark of human intelligence.
By Zhaoyi Joey Hou, Bowei Alvin Zhang, Yining Lu, Bhiman Kumar Baghel, Anneliese Brei, Ximing Lu, Meng Jiang, Faeze Brahman, Snigdha Chaturvedi, Haw-Shiuan Chang, Daniel Khashabi, Xiang Lorraine Li
arXiv:2603. 19087v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Creativity is the ability to come up with novel ideas, a capacity crucial for human development and flourishing.
By Qiawen Ella Liu, Marina Dubova, Henry Conklin, Takumi Harada, Thomas L. Griffiths
arXiv:2606. 11762v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in language understanding, reasoning, and generation, sparking growing interest in their creative potential.
By Min Sen Tan, Zachary Kit Chun Choy, Syed Ali Redha Alsagoff, Nadya Yuki Wangsajaya, Mohor Banerjee, Swaagat Bikash Saikia, Alvin Chan
arXiv:2608. 19437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Many benchmarks track Large Language Model (LLM) performance on tasks with verifiable answers, but less is known about how LLM performance is evolving on open-ended tasks, where creativity, originality and diversity may matter as much as quality.
By Nirav Patel, Josiah Crossman, Eva Aggarwal, Emily Wenger
arXiv:2602. 12811v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: When humans and large language models (LLMs) process the same text, activations in the LLMs correlate with brain activity measured, e.
By Laurent Bonnasse-Gahot, Christophe Pallier
The study investigates whether attention heads in large language models that align with human EEG signals are causally involved in model computation. By ablating these brain‑aligned heads during a pattern‑completion task, the authors find that while such heads contribute to performance, their removal is less disruptive than removing heads selected by attribution patching. The research also distinguishes two families of brain‑aligned heads—novelty and repetition heads—highlighting that novelty heads track human attention but are less critical than random ablation, whereas repetition heads modestly aid performance and align with abstract‑pattern representations.
By Christopher Pinier, Gustaw Opie{\l}ka, Hannes Rosenbusch, Taylor Webb, Michael D. Nunez, Claire E. Stevenson