arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.36239

Cognitive Expert Language Models Better Align with the Corresponding Brain Systems

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) can predict human brain activity across a variety of brain regions during natural language comprehension. Typically, however, LLM-brain alignment is measured using one model for different regions of the brain, and then model performance is summarized across regions. This one-model-fits-all approach ignores the functional specialization of brain regions. In this study, we assess whether a model oriented toward a particular cognitive domain aligns better with the brain system dedicated to that domain. Through prompting and fine-tuning, we first build expert LLM variants for six domains: sensory, spatial, numerical, reasoning, social, and abstract processing. We then examine whether each expert best predicts activity in the brain region associated with the corresponding cognitive domain. Consistent with our hypotheses, each expert's representations align more closely with the brain system most associated with the matching domain than do other experts. This holds under both prompting and fine-tuning, across three base models and three fMRI datasets. In a series of control analyses, we show that this model-brain alignment is specific to cognitive domain interventions; non-cognitive and surface-level interventions do not result in comparable alignment. Specializing models shifts regional alignment while leaving aggregate prediction accuracy largely unchanged, suggesting that summarizing alignment across regions may obscure regional differences in performance for specific models.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zhivar Sourati, Mengxuan Helen Wu, Nona Ghazizadeh, Jonas Kaplan, Morteza Dehghani, Samuel A. Nastase. 2026-09-28. Cognitive Expert Language Models Better Align with the Corresponding Brain Systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.36239

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

UniGuardian: A Unified Defense for Detecting Prompt Injection, Backdoor Attacks and Adversarial Attacks in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to attacks like prompt injection, backdoor attacks, and adversarial attacks, which manipulate prompts or models to generate harmful outputs. In this paper, departing from traditional deep learning attack paradigms, we explore their intrinsic relationship and collectively term them Prompt Trigger Attacks (PTA). This raises a key question: Given a prompt, can we tell whether a hidden trigger is steering the model's behavior? We propose UniGuardian, to the best of our knowledge the first training-free LLM detector to jointly detect successfully activated prompt injection, backdoor, and adversarial attacks without knowing the attack type. Its shared mechanism measures how structured prompt perturbations shift the model's output distribution. Additionally, we introduce a single-forward strategy to optimize the detection pipeline, enabling simultaneous attack detection and text generation within a shared batched forward pass at each decoding step. Our experiments confirm that UniGuardian accurately and efficiently identifies trigger-activated prompts in LLMs.

cs.CL↗

PUMA: Learning a Mutation-Aware Vocabulary of Protein Units

Modeling protein sequences as a language has made language models a powerful tool in computational biology, yet the language itself remains poorly understood. A key step toward understanding it is identifying its constituent units. In natural languages, morphemes can occur in multiple forms; similarly, in proteins, mutations can give rise to variations of a unit that persist through evolution, forming families of related units. We introduce PUMA (Protein Units via Mutation-Aware Merging), an algorithm that learns protein units from sequence and explores their mutational variants using substitution matrices, forming a genealogy of unit families. Our results show that mutations remaining within a PUMA family are more often benign than the substitution matrix alone predicts, and that PUMA genealogy improves molecular function representations compared to treating units independently. A case study of a unit family demonstrates relatedness beyond homology. PUMA achieves competitive performance on downstream tasks when used as a protein language model tokenizer. Moreover, collapsing units into families results in a smaller embedding table and faster training. Together, these results support PUMA as a biologically grounded protein vocabulary that organizes protein units into plausible families of mutational variants. The source code is available at https://github.com/boun-tabi-lifelu/PUMA.

cs.CL↗

When Guessing is Rewarded: Rethinking Language Model Evaluation with Distributional Uncertainty Scoring

Standard language model evaluation assigns scores to single predicted answers, rewarding high-confidence responses regardless of how residual probability mass is distributed over alternative options. This creates a systematic pressure toward overconfident guessing: under accuracy-based schemes, a model maximises its expected score by always committing to an answer rather than abstaining, even when its uncertainty is high. While penalty-based approaches partially address this by raising the confidence threshold for strategic guessing, they still treat all sub-threshold responses identically, ignoring a fundamental distinction in how models can express uncertainty - for example between hedging toward incorrect answers versus hedging toward "I don't know" responses. This paper introduces a novel evaluation metric to solve this problem of not considering a model's entire probability distribution over answer choices. The metric naturally distinguishes between harmful overconfidence in wrong answers and uncertainty expressed through abstention, providing scores in an interpretable default range. Through theoretical analysis and illustrative examples, the metric is shown to offer a more nuanced and aligned evaluation paradigm that incentivises models to express genuine uncertainty rather than guessing. Adapting 12 existing evaluation benchmarks to the metric's variants and measuring performance on six language models shows that for half of the tested benchmarks scores are negative across all tested models, indicating significant tendencies towards hallucination.

cs.CL↗