arXiv:2606. 05206v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Fragmentation is common in interdisciplinary fields with diverse methods and theoretical commitments.
arXiv:2606. 11208v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Biomedical findings often seem to conflict across studies, but many of these differences are context-dependent rather than true contradictions.
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.
arXiv:2608. 12717v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mechanistic interpretability of large language models lacks spatially resolved, falsifiable tools for testing whether internal components are specialized for distinct cognitive operations.
arXiv:2608.29582v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current evaluations of large language models (LLMs) primarily focus on factual knowledge retrieval, overlooking the fundamental challenge of navigati...
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.
The article presents a technical manual for an open toolkit designed to measure how transformer language models individuate word meanings across different contexts. It introduces the concept of a "bridge form"—a single word that appears unchanged in multiple domains but with distinct senses—and outlines a full pipeline from specifying these forms to extracting layer-wise representations, computing silhouette-based separation metrics, and visualizing results. The manual details each design choice and its intended methodological safeguards, emphasizing that it serves as a methodological reference rather than reporting empirical findings.
The paper investigates how large language models handle domain-specific jargon, comparing a general-purpose Llama‑3.1 with a version fine‑tuned on medical data. Two new medical jargon benchmarks reveal that the general model actually outperforms the fine‑tuned variant, and interpretability tools show the fine‑tuned model over‑emphasizes a few components linked to jargon predictions. Reweighting these components narrows the performance gap, and some jargon‑sensitive components also aid materials‑science tasks, indicating a partially domain‑agnostic representation of specialized terminology.
arXiv:2607.15870v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Human label variation in natural language inference is increasingly treated as signal rather than noise, but how much of it formal semantic structu...
arXiv:2601. 12805v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing promise in biomedical research, particularly for knowledge-driven interpretation tasks.
arXiv:2606.21359v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to communicate and explain scientific concepts, yet their tendency to hallucinate poses signific...
arXiv:2606. 26130v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to guide research methodology, yet their default methodological tendencies under minimal prompting remain unclear.
arXiv:2603. 28387v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Trustworthy clinical AI requires that performance gains reflect genuine evidence integration rather than surface-level artifacts.