analiza aiqbench
This is a cognitive science measurement study that uses sentence embeddings as its core instrument. It proposes metrics for how much people's definitions of the same concept overlap (sharedness) and how much is person-specific (idiosyncrasy), and it checks the embedding space against a chance baseline and a consistency ceiling. For AI readers, the useful signal is the evaluation design: whether embeddings capture human meaning variation reliably across three encoders, with the main caveat that a 0.630 accuracy leaves substantial room between chance and ceiling.
Concept Representations in Vector Space: Quantifying Sharedness and Idiosyncrasy of Meaning
arXiv:2610.15496v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Concepts are the basic units through which we navigate the world and communicate meaning. But do you and I really mean the same thing when we think or speak about a concept? The present study develops a measurement framework for modeling and analyzing interindividual variation in concept representations through sentence embeddings, dense vector representations mapping entire utterances into a shared geometric space. The framework is developed in a theoretical argument and validated, demonstrated, and subjected to robustness checks in a pre-registered study. Short personal definitions, elicited from $N = 125$ participants, are encoded as sentence embeddings and submitted pairwise to a crossed random effects model yielding two concept-level quantities: sharedness ($S_b$), the expected dissimilarity between two randomly drawn individuals, and idiosyncrasy ($I_b$), the person-specific share of total dyadic variance. Two validity tests support the approach: the embedding space fully recovers concept and domain organization from participant definitions even with the target word excluded, and a parameter-free classifier achieves 0.630 accuracy in a within-participant extensional prediction task against a chance baseline of 0.500 and a consistency ceiling of 0.893. The framework finds theoretically interpretable variation in $S_b$ and establishes $I_b$ as a reliable source of dyadic variance across concepts. Results replicate across three encoders varying in architecture and capacity, providing a reproducible and scalable instrument for the empirical study of meaning variation.
Abstract:Concepts are the basic units through which we navigate the world and communicate meaning. But do you and I really mean the same thing when we think or speak about a concept? The present study develops a measurement framework for modeling and analyzing interindividual variation in concept representations through sentence embeddings, dense vector representations mapping entire utterances into a shared geometric space. The framework is developed in a theoretical argument and validated, demonstrated, and subjected to robustness checks in a pre-registered study. Short personal definitions, elicited from $N = 125$ participants, are encoded as sentence embeddings and submitted pairwise to a crossed random effects model yielding two concept-level quantities: sharedness ($S_b$), the expected dissimilarity between two randomly drawn individuals, and idiosyncrasy ($I_b$), the person-specific share of total dyadic variance. Two validity tests support the approach: the embedding space fully recovers concept and domain organization from participant definitions even with the target word excluded, and a parameter-free classifier achieves 0.630 accuracy in a within-participant extensional prediction task against a chance baseline of 0.500 and a consistency ceiling of 0.893. The framework finds theoretically interpretable variation in $S_b$ and establishes $I_b$ as a reliable source of dyadic variance across concepts. Results replicate across three encoders varying in architecture and capacity, providing a reproducible and scalable instrument for the empirical study of meaning variation.
22 pages, 6 figures. Preprint under review at Open Mind: Discoveries in Cognitive Science. Data, code and pre-registration: this https URL
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2610.15496 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2610.15496v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.15496 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 337 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · 31 iul. 2026
J++ Lens: Jacobian Filtering Enables More Faithful Workspace Lenses
LessWrong · 8 oct. 2026

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · 3 aug. 2026

Manifolds for Five-Year Olds
LessWrong · 12 oct. 2026