analiza aiqbench
This research exposes a critical flaw in automatic depression detection models, revealing that high accuracy scores often stem from exploiting fixed interviewer prompts rather than genuine patient linguistic cues. By isolating participant utterances, the study demonstrates how script artifacts inflate performance across different architectures and datasets, urging a shift toward interpretable models grounded in actual conversational content.
When Consistency Becomes Bias: Interviewer Effects in Semi-Structured Clinical Interviews
arXiv:2603.24651v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Automatic depression detection from doctor-patient conversations has gained momentum thanks to the availability of public corpora and advances in language modeling. However, interpretability remains limited: strong performance is often reported without revealing what drives predictions. We analyze three datasets: ANDROIDS, DAIC-WOZ, E-DAIC and identify a systematic bias from interviewer prompts in semi-structured interviews. Models trained on interviewer turns exploit fixed prompts and positions to distinguish depressed from control subjects, often achieving high classification scores without using participant language. Restricting models to participant utterances distributes decision evidence more broadly and reflects genuine linguistic cues. While semi-structured protocols ensure consistency, including interviewer prompts inflates performance by leveraging script artifacts. Our results highlight a cross-dataset, architecture-agnostic bias and emphasize the need for analyses that localize decision evidence by time and speaker to ensure models learn from participants' language.
Abstract:Automatic depression detection from doctor-patient conversations has gained momentum thanks to the availability of public corpora and advances in language modeling. However, interpretability remains limited: strong performance is often reported without revealing what drives predictions. We analyze three datasets: ANDROIDS, DAIC-WOZ, E-DAIC and identify a systematic bias from interviewer prompts in semi-structured interviews. Models trained on interviewer turns exploit fixed prompts and positions to distinguish depressed from control subjects, often achieving high classification scores without using participant language. Restricting models to participant utterances distributes decision evidence more broadly and reflects genuine linguistic cues. While semi-structured protocols ensure consistency, including interviewer prompts inflates performance by leveraging script artifacts. Our results highlight a cross-dataset, architecture-agnostic bias and emphasize the need for analyses that localize decision evidence by time and speaker to ensure models learn from participants' language.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Sound (cs.SD); Audio and Speech Processing (eess.AS)
arXiv:2603.24651 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2603.24651v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.24651 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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 · 238 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Expenditure Horizon: Measuring Optimization Ability, with an Application to NanoGPT
METR · 21 iul. 2026

Why I Left Google DeepMind
LessWrong · 15 iul. 2026

The basic argument for making AI better at moral philosophy
LessWrong · 14 oct. 2026

It’s about ethics in journalism, with Ben Smith
The Verge · 17 aug. 2026