aiqbench analysis
This research investigates the interpretability of Domain-Adapted models via Prompt-based Fine-tuning (DAPF) for dementia detection, revealing a critical gap between high diagnostic accuracy and token-level explanation faithfulness. The study demonstrates that while the [MASK] representation effectively captures diagnosis information, attribution analyses are largely driven by linguistic artifacts rather than genuine causal factors, challenging the reliability of current explainability methods in low-resource medical settings.
Behind the [MASK]: Disentangling Representation and Faithfulness in DAPF-Based Dementia Detection
arXiv:2608.25028v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Spoken-language analysis via prompt-based domain-adaptive models is a promising direction for low-resource, non-invasive dementia screening, but such models remain internally opaque. We study the interpretability of the Domain-Adapted models via Prompt-based Fine-tuning (DAPF) framework, which casts dementia detection as diagnosis-related masked-token prediction. We interpret DAPF and strong baselines using a variety of probing and analysis techniques, finding that DAPF achieved the best overall performance (accuracy=0.83 and macro-F1=0.83) with diagnosis most recoverable from its [MASK] representation. However, this representational advantage did not extend to token-level explanation faithfulness. DAPF attributions primarily reflected language task vocabulary, discourse markers, and transcription artifacts, with perturbation tests showing weak or negative effects. This suggests that its masked-token interface determines diagnosis information without producing faithful token-level explanations.
Abstract:Spoken-language analysis via prompt-based domain-adaptive models is a promising direction for low-resource, non-invasive dementia screening, but such models remain internally opaque. We study the interpretability of the Domain-Adapted models via Prompt-based Fine-tuning (DAPF) framework, which casts dementia detection as diagnosis-related masked-token prediction. We interpret DAPF and strong baselines using a variety of probing and analysis techniques, finding that DAPF achieved the best overall performance (accuracy=0.83 and macro-F1=0.83) with diagnosis most recoverable from its [MASK] representation. However, this representational advantage did not extend to token-level explanation faithfulness. DAPF attributions primarily reflected language task vocabulary, discourse markers, and transcription artifacts, with perturbation tests showing weak or negative effects. This suggests that its masked-token interface determines diagnosis information without producing faithful token-level explanations.
16 pages, 1 figure, 19 tables. Under review at ACL Rolling Review
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2608.25028 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.25028v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.25028 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 230 words
Related coverage
J++ Lens: Jacobian Filtering Enables More Faithful Workspace Lenses
LessWrong · Oct 8, 2026
Dropless MoE Training in JAX with Primus-Turbo
AMD · Jun 10, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026

PIRAMID: Progress and Plans
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026