Research Papers

Bangladesh has an estimated 1.17 mental-health professionals per 100,000 population and only six child psychiatrists nationwide. No Bengali-language, culturally adapted tool exists for early screening of abuse-related psychological trauma in children. We present ShishuRaksha AI, a decision-support (not diagnostic) framework that fuses four screening modalities: validated questionnaires (SDQ, CPSS), Bengali narrative text, House-Tree-Person (HTP) drawing features, and facial affect. The fusion is training-free and clinically weighted, uses cross-modal attention, and includes a single-modality override rule. Every risk score is explained through clinically weighted, perturbation-based additive attribution and rendered as a bilingual (Bangla/English) report with referral routing to national child-protection services (OCC, DSS, NMHH) under the Children Act 2013. No clinical dataset of abused children can be collected ethically at this stage, so we introduce a noise-aware synthetic benchmark (500 cases, 116 positive [23.2%], four deliberate noise layers, literature-grounded HTP priors) and evaluate tree-ensemble surrogates of the fusion design (facial channel excluded) under 5-fold stratified cross-validation. The fused model reaches an AUC of 0.874 [0.834-0.908], against 0.756 [0.705-0.803] for an SDQ-only baseline, with ablation, operating-point, subgroup, and calibration analyses. We state all limitations openly, including synthetic-only data, no held-out set, text-feature circularity, and an urban-rural subgroup gap. This work is a feasibility study and a design contribution toward ethically deployable child-protection screening in low-resource settings.

Background: AI/ML-enabled medical devices are increasingly deployed in healthcare under evolving regulatory frameworks. As these systems become more integrated into clinical decision-making, there is growing expectation that they demonstrate key dimensions of trustworthy AI to support clinician, patient, and public trust. Whether publicly available regulatory documentation provides sufficient evidence to independently assess the trustworthiness of cleared AI systems remains unclear. Methods: We analysed FDA AI/ML-enabled medical device summary reports published between 2021 and 2025. Reports underwent automated keyword screening followed by multi-stage manual consensus review to identify documented evidence for the six FUTURE-AI principles: Fairness, Universality, Traceability, Usability, Robustness, and Explainability. Descriptive, temporal, and clinical-domain analyses were performed. Multivariable logistic regression assessed whether year of clearance or clinical domain predicted higher reporting transparency, defined as evidence reported for three or more principles. Results: Of 1,105 FDA summary reports screened, 519 were included. Trustworthy AI reporting was limited and uneven. Nearly one quarter (24.7%) provided no evidence for any principle, and none documented evidence across all six. Robustness was most frequently reported (57.6%), while Traceability (8.3%) and Explainability (3.5%) were the most pronounced gaps. Neither year of clearance (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88-1.19) nor clinical domain (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46-1.15) predicted higher reporting transparency. Interpretation: Substantial, persistent trustworthy AI reporting gaps exist in FDA documentation. Regulatory approval alone should not be considered a proxy for trustworthiness. Standardised, audit-ready reporting across the AI lifecycle is needed to support independent assessment and responsible adoption of healthcare AI.

Explainability is central to building trustworthy AI, yet explanation interfaces can inadvertently provide adversaries with an expanded privacy-related attack surfaces. Recent studies show that advanced membership-inference attacks succeed by exploiting confidence-drop trajectories, induced through attribution-guided perturbations, as discriminative features, rather than directly using confidence scores or explanation vectors. Existing defenses against membership inference fail to directly mitigate such explanation-driven attacks. In this work, we investigate whether, during training, a model's own gradients can be leveraged as defense signals against such attacks, thereby aligning explanation profiles between members and non-members. To this end, we propose a Trajectory-Invariant Explanation Regularization (TIER) defense that penalizes erratic fluctuations in confidence drops simulated through gradient-guided perturbations and simultaneously minimizes the distributional shifts via KL-divergence. Unlike conventional adversarial training, which emphasizes label robustness, our approach targets explanation robustness by enforcing self-consistency through KL-divergence and reducing the variance of confidence drops between members and non-members. Extensive experiments confirm that our method effectively mitigates these attacks, delivering privacy protection while maintaining model utility and explanation fidelity.

Algorithmic recourse addresses the challenge of providing tailored recommendations to users affected by unfavorable machine learning decisions, in potentially high-stakes scenarios. Traditional approaches to recourse often rely on the closest counterfactual explanations or assume a priori knowledge of a user's causal structure, resulting in interventions that overlook individual contexts and specific feature interactions. To overcome these limitations, we study a human-in-the-loop framework that iteratively approximates the user's structural causal model through interactive queries via Bayesian inference before producing recourse recommendations. This framework exploits humans' feedback to improve the identification of causal effects, allowing personalized recourse that is plausible, cost-effective, and aligned with the actual causal dependencies of each user. As a proof of concept, we evaluate this framework through simulated human responses. Our simulations across linear and non-linear causal models show promising results, though challenges remain in capturing complex, non-linear structures, emphasizing the importance of accurate approximations and robust noise distribution modeling.

Language models have become a major mediator of politically relevant information and are used to assist decision-making in high-stakes settings. Due to their wide use, the developers of popular AI systems have a powerful ability to subtly influence the marketplace of ideas. Recognizing this, many AI companies have publicly discussed the importance of AI systems not taking positions or disseminating information in ways that favor special interests. In this paper, we ask whether popular AI systems have a tendency to downplay the controversies associated with the companies that created them. In a pre-registered experiment, we elicit open-ended discussions from 21 models from 7 companies on 206 negative news stories using 25 prompt templates to assess how favorably each model discusses controversies from each company. We find strong evidence (p<10^-5) that models from xAI, DeepSeek, Anthropic, and OpenAI tend to discuss controversies from their respective companies in a differentially positive way compared to others. We find no such evidence for Alibaba, Meta, and Google. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of the differing implications of whether these behaviors were intentionally given to models by developers, unintentionally given to models by developers, or represent a form of emergent misalignment.

This study provides a theoretical expansion of the recent Data Relativistic Uncertainty (DRU) framework by formalizing a physics-to-AI paradigm for image enhancement. By modeling images as probabilistic wave functions rather than deterministic states, the paradigm explicitly integrates wave-particle duality to illustrate the system flow of how DRU leverages the intrinsic physical uncertainty of light, a dimension requiring further theoretical discussion. Consequently, this paradigm provides a rigorous Explainable AI (XAI) approach that enhances the interpretability of how DRU mitigates illumination bias and maintains robustness against data noise.

Algebraic Model Counting for Global Analysis of Optimal Decision Trees

Hiroki Arimura

Ensuring model reliability in Explainable AI requires a global assessment of the hypothesis space. We propose a formal framework for the exhaustive analysis of optimal and near-optimal decision trees, called Algebraic Decision Tree Counting (ADTC). Inspired by Algebraic Model Counting (AMC) in knowledge representation, ADTC reformulates diverse analytical tasks, such as optimization, counting, and sampling, into a unified sum-of-products computation over a semiring $R$. While the hypothesis space of decision trees is doubly exponential with respect to the maximum depth $Δ$, our dynamic programming algorithm achieves $O^*(n^{O(Δ)})$ time complexity in the number of features $n$, where $O^*$ suppresses polynomial factors. To handle complex constraints consisting of multiple tree metrics, we introduce model behavior tensors that aggregate semiring values via convolution products over a tensor semiring. This algebraic approach efficiently constructs a model profile that captures the global landscape and trade-offs between criteria such as accuracy, size, and fairness. We demonstrate the utility of our software, emtrees, on real-world datasets, illustrating how ADTC facilitates evidence-based model selection in sensitive domains.

Mental health disorders affect nearly one billion people globally, yet 75% of individuals in low- and middle-income countries receive no treatment due to workforce shortages, cost barriers, and stigma. Current AI-powered wellness solutions predominantly rely on single-mode conversational interfaces that suffer high abandonment rates and fail to provide measurable, immediate relief calibrated to users' dynamic emotional states. This paper presents Copewell, a novel multi-agent swarm system designed to expand access to mental wellness support through human-centered AI principles. Our architecture introduces three technical innovations: (1) a multi-source assessment framework integrating self-reported, physiological, and contextual data to mitigate algorithmic bias; (2) valence-arousal emotion mapping using Russell's Circumplex Model of Affect to route users to specialized AI agents; and (3) dual-mode intervention delivery combining conversational support with evidence-based sensory wellness protocols. We examine the sociotechnical design considerations underlying Copewell's development, including a privacy-first architecture, embedded ethical oversight through a dedicated Ethics Supervisor agent, and participatory design informed by mental health practitioners. Early practitioner engagement and beta deployment inform design decisions and identify directions for future empirical evaluation. This work contributes to responsible AI discourse by demonstrating how technical architecture can operationalize equity and safety principles from inception.

Personality Without Persons? A Psychometric Critique of Big Five Testing in Large Language Models

Kim Zierahn, Cristina Cachero, Anna Korhonen +1

Human personality inventories are increasingly used to characterize large language models (LLMs), compare systems, and inform downstream governance claims. Yet, these inventories were developed and validated for humans, and it remains unclear whether they are valid for non-human systems. We present a systematic psychometric evaluation of Big Five personality measurement in LLMs. We ask three research questions: Do Big Five inventories a) appropriately describe LLMs, b) capture meaningful differences between models, and c) reflect internal factors consistent with human personality? We assess the content validity of five candidate Big Five inventories and administer the best-performing inventory to N = 264 LLMs spanning 50 model families. Our findings are threefold. First, Big Five items adapted for LLMs achieve acceptable content validity, whereas the original human-developed items do not. Second, Big Five inventories fail to capture meaningful differences across LLMs: between-model variance accounts for only 7% - 17% of the total score variance. Third, LLMs responses do not reproduce the canonical Big Five five-factor structure of human personality, with four of the five personality facets collapsing into one (r >= .90). Moreover, comparisons between base and instruction-tuned variants suggest that alignment training shifts Big Five scores toward socially desirable profiles. These findings demonstrate that Big Five inventories do not measure a construct equivalent to human personality in LLMs. Thus, using human personality frameworks to characterize, benchmark, compare, or govern LLMs risks producing misleading conclusions. We highlight the need for evaluation frameworks that are specifically designed and validated for LLMs, rather than transferring human psychological constructs without first establishing their validity.

Watermarking for Proprietary Dataset Protection

John Kirchenbauer, Brian R. Bartoldson, Bhavya Kailkhura +1

A growing body of literature suggests that training data membership inference problems are fundamentally hard tasks in modern language modeling settings. We argue that output watermarking techniques are the right gadget to make training membership tests for generative models more tractable, based on prior results showing that language models exhibit residual watermark "radioactivity" under partially watermarked training datasets. We pit a watermark-based dataset inference approach head-to-head against traditional loss-based membership inference methods and show that watermarking can achieve comparable membership detection performance when subset exposure is high enough, under an alternate set of assumptions.

Predicting cancer drug response from transcriptomic profiles is a cornerstone of precision oncology, yet the scientific value of machine learning models hinges not solely on predictive accuracy, but also on their capacity to generate reliable biological insights. Current explainability approaches in this setting are computationally costly, lack robustness, and reduce complex drug response to univariate gene importance scores, overlooking the coordinated gene activity that drives sensitivity and resistance. In this work, we present ILLUME+, a scalable post-hoc explainability framework that moves beyond single-gene assessments to capture multiple, complementary forms of explanation. Integrated into our end-to-end pipeline, ILLUME+ produces more stable gene importance scores than existing baselines, recovers established drug-gene associations and mechanisms of action, and enables AI-assisted hypothesis generation to uncover novel interaction-driven molecular signals in cancer biology.

Sixth Generation (6G) communication networks are expected to evolve into AI-native, highly autonomous ecosystems that integrate communication, computing, sensing, and artificial intelligence. While these capabilities enable unprecedented connectivity and intelligent services, they also create a highly heterogeneous security and privacy landscape that cannot be addressed through isolated, technology-specific solutions. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of security and privacy in AI-native 6G networks from a cross-layer perspective. We first examine the fragmentation of existing security and privacy approaches across emerging technologies, network architectures, AI systems, and standardization efforts, motivating the need for a unified security and privacy framework. Building upon this framework, we develop a cross-layer threat taxonomy encompassing infrastructure, network and architectural, AI, privacy, and security management domains, and analyze representative threats across key AI-native 6G technologies. Furthermore, we map these threats to corresponding cross-layer countermeasures, including standards harmonization as a security function, and identify critical research gaps and future priorities for secure, interoperable, and trustworthy AI-native 6G ecosystems. Finally, we discuss future research directions toward realizing secure, privacy-preserving, resilient, and globally interoperable 6G networks. This survey provides researchers, practitioners, and standardization communities with a holistic foundation for the design, evaluation, and deployment of trustworthy AI-native 6G systems.