Research Papers

Non-stationary environments require agents to revise previously learned action values when contingencies change. We treat large language models (LLMs) as sequential decision policies in a two-option probabilistic reversal-learning task with three latent states and switch events triggered by either a performance criterion or timeout. We compare a deterministic fixed transition cycle to a stochastic random schedule that increases volatility, and evaluate DeepSeek-V3.2, Gemini-3, and GPT-5.2, with human data as a behavioural reference. Across models, win-stay was near ceiling while lose-shift was markedly attenuated, revealing asymmetric use of positive versus negative evidence. DeepSeek-V3.2 showed extreme perseveration after reversals and weak acquisition, whereas Gemini-3 and GPT-5.2 adapted more rapidly but still remained less loss-sensitive than humans. Random transitions amplified reversal-specific persistence across LLMs yet did not uniformly reduce total wins, demonstrating that high aggregate payoff can coexist with rigid adaptation. Hierarchical reinforcement-learning (RL) fits indicate dissociable mechanisms: rigidity can arise from weak loss learning, inflated policy determinism, or value polarisation via counterfactual suppression. These results motivate reversal-sensitive diagnostics and volatility-aware models for evaluating LLMs under non-stationary uncertainty.

Towards Verified and Targeted Explanations through Formal Methods

Hanchen David Wang, Diego Manzanas Lopez, Preston K. Robinette +3

As deep neural networks are deployed in safety-critical domains such as autonomous driving and medical diagnosis, stakeholders need explanations that are interpretable but also trustworthy with formal guarantees. Existing XAI methods fall short: heuristic attribution techniques (e.g., LIME, Integrated Gradients) highlight influential features but offer no mathematical guarantees about decision boundaries, while formal methods verify robustness yet remain untargeted, analyzing the nearest boundary regardless of whether it represents a critical risk. In safety-critical systems, not all misclassifications carry equal consequences; confusing a "Stop" sign for a "60 kph" sign is far more dangerous than confusing it with a "No Passing" sign. We introduce ViTaX (Verified and Targeted Explanations), a formal XAI framework that generates targeted semifactual explanations with mathematical guarantees. For a given input (class y) and a user-specified critical alternative (class t), ViTaX: (1) identifies the minimal feature subset most sensitive to the y->t transition, and (2) applies formal reachability analysis to guarantee that perturbing these features by epsilon cannot flip the classification to t. We formalize this through Targeted epsilon-Robustness, certifying whether a feature subset remains robust under perturbation toward a specific target class. ViTaX is the first method to provide formally guaranteed explanations of a model's resilience against user-identified alternatives. Evaluations on MNIST, GTSRB, EMNIST, and TaxiNet demonstrate over 30% fidelity improvement with minimal explanation cardinality.

Africa's green industrialization imperative demands reliable infrastructure for monitoring air quality. We present a satellite-reanalysis PM2.5 fusion system trained on 2,068,901 records from 404 monitoring locations in 29 African countries (OpenAQ, 2017-2022), combining LightGBM with leakage-resistant spatial cross-validation and conformal prediction to quantify predictions and their geographic applicability limits. Under 5-fold location-grouped spatial cross-validation, LightGBM achieves RMSE = 30.83 +/- 5.07 ug/m3, MAE = 14.54 +/- 1.66 ug/m3, R2 = 0.134 +/- 0.023, and macro F1 = 0.336 +/- 0.018. This R2 is substantially below random-split benchmarks (>0.90) but reflects true geographic generalisation difficulty rather than model failure. Split conformal prediction targeting 90% marginal coverage reveals severe East Africa degradation (actual PICP = 65.3% vs. nominal 90%), consistent with medium-strength covariate shift (humidity KS = 0.2237, sat_pblh KS = 0.2558). We operationalise these findings through regional reliability flags (High/Medium/Low/Unreliable) and a monitor prioritisation score directing infrastructure expansion toward highest-burden unmonitored populations, directly supporting Africa's green industrial transition and SDGs 3.9, 7.1.2, 9, 11.6.2, and 13.

Current AI safety relies on behavioral monitoring and post-training alignment, yet empirical measurement shows these approaches produce no detectable pre-commitment signal in a majority of instruction-tuned models tested. We present an energy-based governance framework connecting transformer inference dynamics to constraint-satisfaction models of neural computation, and apply it to a seven-model cohort across five geometric regimes. Using trajectory tension (rho = ||a|| / ||v||), we identify a 57-token pre-commitment window in Phi-3-mini-4k-instruct under greedy decoding on arithmetic constraint probes. This result is model-specific, task-specific, and configuration-specific, demonstrating that pre-commitment signals can exist but are not universal. We introduce a five-regime taxonomy of inference behavior: Authority Band, Late Signal, Inverted, Flat, and Scaffold-Selective. Energy asymmetry (Σ\r{ho}_misaligned / Σ\r{ho}_aligned) serves as a unifying metric of structural rigidity across these regimes. Across seven models, only one configuration exhibits a predictive signal prior to commitment; all others show silent failure, late detection, inverted dynamics, or flat geometry. We further demonstrate that factual hallucination produces no predictive signal across 72 test conditions, consistent with spurious attractor settling in the absence of a trained world-model constraint. These results establish that rule violation and hallucination are distinct failure modes with different detection requirements. Internal geometry monitoring is effective only where resistance exists; detection of factual confabulation requires external verification mechanisms. This work provides a measurable framework for inference-layer governability and introduces a taxonomy for evaluating deployment risk in autonomous AI systems.

Explainable Machine Learning Reveals 12-Fold Ucp1 Upregulation and Thermogenic Reprogramming in Female Mouse White Adipose Tissue After 37 Days of Microgravity: First AI/ML Analysis of NASA OSD-970

Md. Rashadul Islam

Microgravity induces profound metabolic adaptations in mammalian physiology, yet the molecular mechanisms governing thermogenesis in female white adipose tissue (WAT) remain poorly characterized. This paper presents the first machine learning (ML) analysis of NASA Open Science Data Repository (OSDR) dataset OSD-970, derived from the Rodent Research-1 (RR-1) mission. Using RT-qPCR data from 89 adipogenesis and thermogenesis pathway genes in gonadal WAT of 16 female C57BL/6J mice (8 flight, 8 ground control) following 37 days aboard the International Space Station (ISS), we applied differential expression analysis, multiple ML classifiers with Leave-One-Out Cross-Validation (LOO-CV), and Explainable AI via SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). The most striking finding is a dramatic 12.21-fold upregulation of Ucp1 (Delta-Delta-Ct = -3.61, p = 0.0167) in microgravity-exposed WAT, accompanied by significant activation of the thermogenesis pathway (mean pathway fold-change = 3.24). The best-performing model (Random Forest with top-20 features) achieved AUC = 0.922, Accuracy = 0.812, and F1 = 0.824 via LOO-CV. SHAP analysis consistently ranked Ucp1 among the top predictive features, while Angpt2, Irs2, Jun, and Klf-family transcription factors emerged as dominant consensus classifiers. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed clear separation between flight and ground samples, with PC1 explaining 69.1% of variance. These results suggest rapid thermogenic reprogramming in female WAT as a compensatory response to microgravity. This study demonstrates the power of explainable AI for re-analysis of newly released NASA space biology datasets, with direct implications for female astronaut health on long-duration missions and for Earth-based obesity and metabolic disease research.

In high-stakes settings where machine learning models are used to automate decision-making about individuals, the presence of algorithmic bias can exacerbate systemic harm to certain subgroups of people. These biases often stem from the underlying training data. In practice, interventions to "fix the data" depend on the actual additional data sources available -- where many are less than ideal. In these cases, the effects of data scaling on subgroup performance become volatile, as the improvements from increased sample size are counteracted by the introduction of distribution shifts in the training set. In this paper, we investigate the limitations of combining data sources to improve subgroup performance within the context of healthcare. Clinical models are commonly trained on datasets comprised of patient electronic health record (EHR) data from different hospitals or admission departments. Across two such datasets, the eICU Collaborative Research Database and the MIMIC-IV dataset, we find that data addition can both help and hurt model fairness and performance, and many intuitive strategies for data selection are unreliable. We compare model-based post-hoc calibration and data-centric addition strategies to find that the combination of both is important to improve subgroup performance. Our work questions the traditional dogma of "better data" for overcoming fairness challenges by comparing and combining data- and model-based approaches.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are often deployed on text-only inputs, although they are trained with images. We find that removing the vision modality causes large drops in accuracy and severe miscalibration, and the model does not behave like its original language backbone under text-only prompting. This failure is not explained only by missing semantic information. Even when text descriptions preserve key content, confidence becomes unreliable, while adding a visual signal through generated images partially restores accuracy and calibration. We propose the Latent Imagination Module (LIM), a lightweight cross-attention module that predicts imagined latent embeddings from textual input and feeds them into a frozen VLM backbone without pixel-level image synthesis. Across text-only benchmarks, unseen tasks, and missing-image scenarios, LIM improves accuracy and reduces calibration error. These results suggest that latent modality completion is a practical approach for reliable VLM inference under missing-modality.

Dyslexic spelling errors exhibit systematic phonological and orthographic patterns that distinguish them from the errors produced by typically developing writers. While this observation has motivated dyslexic-specific spell-checking and assistive writing tools, prior work has focused predominantly on error correction rather than attribution, and has largely neglected the ethical risks. The risk of harmful labelling, covert screening, algorithmic bias, and institutional misuse that automated classification of learners entails requires the development of robust ethical and legal frameworks for research in this area. This paper addresses both gaps. We formulate dyslexic error attribution as a binary classification task. Given a misspelt word and its correct target form, determine whether the error pattern is characteristic of a dyslexic or non-dyslexic writer. We develop a comprehensive feature set capturing orthographic, phonological, and morphological properties of each error, and propose a twin-input neural model evaluated against traditional machine learning baselines under writer-independent conditions. The neural model achieves 93.01% accuracy and an F1-score of 94.01%, with phonetically plausible errors and vowel confusions emerging as the strongest attribution signals. We situate these technical results within an explicit ethics-first framework, analysing fairness across subgroups, the interpretability requirements of educational deployment, and the conditions, consent, transparency, human oversight, and recourse, under which a system could be responsibly used. We provide concrete guidelines for ethical deployment and an open discussion of the systems limitations and misuse potential. Our results demonstrate that dyslexic error attribution is feasible at high accuracy while underscoring that feasibility alone is insufficient for deployment in high-stakes educational contexts.

AI-native 6G networks promise to transform the telecom industry by enabling dynamic resource allocation, predictive maintenance, and ultra-reliable low-latency communications across all layers, which are essential for applications such as smart cities, autonomous vehicles, and immersive XR. However, the deployment of 6G systems results in severe data scarcity, hindering the training of efficient AI models. Synthetic data generation is extensively used to fill this gap; however, it introduces challenges related to dataset bias, auditability, and compliance with regulatory frameworks. In this regard, we propose the Synthetic Data Generation with Ethics Audit Loop (SEAL) framework, which extends baseline modular pipelines with an Ethical and Regulatory Compliance by Design (ERCD) module and a Federated Learning (FL) feedback system. The ERCD integrates fairness, bias detection, and standardized audit trails for regulatory mapping, while the FL enables privacy-preserving calibration using aggregated insights from real testbeds to close the reality-simulation gap. Results show that the SEAL framework outperforms existing methods in terms of Frechet Inception Distance, equalized odds, and accuracy. These results validate the framework's ability to generate auditable and bias-mitigated synthetic data for responsible AI-native 6G development.

Understanding how Large Language Models (LLMs) process information from prompts remains a significant challenge. To shed light on this "black box," attention visualization techniques have been developed to capture neuron-level perceptions and interpret how models focus on different parts of input data. However, many existing techniques are tailored to specific model architectures, particularly within the Transformer family, and often require backpropagation, resulting in nearly double the GPU memory usage and increased computational cost. A lightweight, model-agnostic approach for attention visualization remains lacking. In this paper, we introduce a model-agnostic token importance visualization technique to better understand how generative AI systems perceive and prioritize information from input text, without incurring additional computational cost. Our method leverages perturbation-based strategies combined with a three-matrix analytical framework to generate relevance maps that illustrate token-level contributions to model predictions. The framework comprises: (1) the Angular Deviation Matrix, which captures shifts in semantic direction; (2) the Magnitude Deviation Matrix, which measures changes in semantic intensity; and (3) the Dimensional Importance Matrix, which evaluates contributions across individual vector dimensions. By systematically removing each token and measuring the resulting impact across these three complementary dimensions, we derive a composite importance score that provides a nuanced and mathematically grounded measure of token significance. To support reproducibility and foster wider adoption, we provide open-source implementations of all proposed and utilized explainability techniques, with code and resources publicly available at https://github.com/Infosys/Infosys-Responsible-AI-Toolkit

Documentation-based disclosure has become a central governance strategy for responsible AI, particularly in public-sector procurement. Tools such as model cards, datasheets, and AI FactSheets are increasingly expected to support accountability, risk assessment, and informed decision-making across organizational boundaries. Yet there is limited empirical evidence about how these artifacts are produced, interpreted, and used in practice. In this paper, we present a qualitative study of the GovAI Coalition FactSheet, a widely adopted transparency document designed to support AI procurement and governance in government contexts. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with vendors and public-sector practitioners, alongside a systematic analysis of completed FactSheets, we examine how FactSheets are used, what information they surface, and where they fall short. We find that FactSheets are asked to serve multiple and conflicting purposes simultaneously: showcasing vendor offerings, supporting evaluation and due diligence, and facilitating early-stage dialogue between vendors and agencies. These competing expectations, combined with the structural constraints of voluntary and public self-disclosure, limit the ability of FactSheets to function as standalone evaluation or risk-assessment tools. At the same time, our findings suggest that when understood as relational artifacts used to establish trust, shared understanding, and ongoing dialogue, FactSheets can help create conditions that support more meaningful disclosure and governance over time.

Post-hoc explanation methods are widely used to interpret black-box predictions, but their generation is often computationally expensive and their reliability is not guaranteed. We propose epistemic uncertainty as a low-cost proxy for explanation reliability: high epistemic uncertainty identifies regions where the decision boundary is poorly defined and where explanations become unstable and unfaithful. This insight enables two complementary use cases: `improving worst-case explanations' (routing samples to cheap or expensive XAI methods based on expected explanation reliability), and `recalling high-quality explanations' (deferring explanation generation for uncertain samples under constrained budget). Across four tabular datasets, five diverse architectures, and four XAI methods, we observe a strong negative correlation between epistemic uncertainty and explanation stability. Further analysis shows that epistemic uncertainty distinguishes not only stable from unstable explanations, but also faithful from unfaithful ones. Experiments on image classification confirm that our findings generalize beyond tabular data.