The diagnosis of most mental disorders, including psychiatric evaluations, primarily depends on dialogues between psychiatrists and patients. This subjective process can lead to variability in diagnoses across clinicians and patients, resulting in inconsistencies and challenges in achieving reliable outcomes. To address these issues and standardize psychiatric diagnoses, we propose a Fine-Tuned Large Language Model (LLM) Consortium and OpenAI-gpt-oss Reasoning LLM-enabled Decision Support System for the clinical diagnosis of mental disorders. Our approach leverages fine-tuned LLMs trained on conversational datasets involving psychiatrist-patient interactions focused on mental health conditions (e.g., depression). The diagnostic predictions from individual models are aggregated through a consensus-based decision-making process, refined by the OpenAI-gpt-oss reasoning LLM. We propose a novel method for deploying LLM agents that orchestrate communication between the LLM consortium and the reasoning LLM, ensuring transparency, reliability, and responsible AI across the entire diagnostic workflow. Experimental results demonstrate the transformative potential of combining fine-tuned LLMs with a reasoning model to create a robust and highly accurate diagnostic system for mental health assessment. A prototype of the proposed platform, integrating three fine-tuned LLMs with the OpenAI-gpt-oss reasoning LLM, was developed in collaboration with the U.S. Army Medical Research Team in Norfolk, Virginia, USA. To the best of our knowledge, this work represents the first application of a fine-tuned LLM consortium integrated with a reasoning LLM for clinical mental health diagnosis paving the way for next-generation AI-powered eHealth systems aimed at standardizing psychiatric diagnoses.

Large Language Models (LLMs) play a pivotal role in generating vast arrays of narratives, facilitating a systematic exploration of their effectiveness for communicating life events in narrative form. In this study, we employ a zero-shot structured narrative prompt to generate 24,000 narratives using OpenAI's GPT-4. From this dataset, we manually classify 2,880 narratives and evaluate their validity in conveying birth, death, hiring, and firing events. Remarkably, 87.43% of the narratives sufficiently convey the intention of the structured prompt. To automate the identification of valid and invalid narratives, we train and validate nine Machine Learning models on the classified datasets. Leveraging these models, we extend our analysis to predict the classifications of the remaining 21,120 narratives. All the ML models excelled at classifying valid narratives as valid, but experienced challenges at simultaneously classifying invalid narratives as invalid. Our findings not only advance the study of LLM capabilities, limitations, and validity but also offer practical insights for narrative generation and natural language processing applications.

The rapid growth of distributed energy resources (DERs), such as renewable energy sources, generators, consumers, and prosumers in the smart grid infrastructure, poses significant cybersecurity and trust challenges to the grid controller. Consequently, it is crucial to identify adversarial tactics and measure the strength of the attacker's DER. To enable a trustworthy smart grid controller, this work investigates a trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) mechanism for proactive identification and explanation of the cyber risk caused by the control/status message of DERs. Thus, proposing and developing a trustworthy AI framework to facilitate the deployment of any AI algorithms for detecting potential cyber threats and analyzing root causes based on Shapley value interpretation while dynamically quantifying the risk of an attack based on Ward's minimum variance formula. The experiment with a state-of-the-art dataset establishes the proposed framework as a trustworthy AI by fulfilling the capabilities of reliability, fairness, explainability, transparency, reproducibility, and accountability.

Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) twin systems will be a fundamental enabler of zero-touch network and service management (ZSM) for sixth-generation (6G) wireless networks. A reliable XAI twin system for ZSM requires two composites: an extreme analytical ability for discretizing the physical behavior of the Internet of Everything (IoE) and rigorous methods for characterizing the reasoning of such behavior. In this paper, a novel neuro-symbolic explainable artificial intelligence twin framework is proposed to enable trustworthy ZSM for a wireless IoE. The physical space of the XAI twin executes a neural-network-driven multivariate regression to capture the time-dependent wireless IoE environment while determining unconscious decisions of IoE service aggregation. Subsequently, the virtual space of the XAI twin constructs a directed acyclic graph (DAG)-based Bayesian network that can infer a symbolic reasoning score over unconscious decisions through a first-order probabilistic language model. Furthermore, a Bayesian multi-arm bandits-based learning problem is proposed for reducing the gap between the expected explained score and the current obtained score of the proposed neuro-symbolic XAI twin. To address the challenges of extensible, modular, and stateless management functions in ZSM, the proposed neuro-symbolic XAI twin framework consists of two learning systems: 1) an implicit learner that acts as an unconscious learner in physical space, and 2) an explicit leaner that can exploit symbolic reasoning based on implicit learner decisions and prior evidence. Experimental results show that the proposed neuro-symbolic XAI twin can achieve around 96.26% accuracy while guaranteeing from 18% to 44% more trust score in terms of reasoning and closed-loop automation.

Agent-based modeling (ABM) is a powerful paradigm to gain insight into social phenomena. One area that ABM has rarely been applied is coalition formation. Traditionally, coalition formation is modeled using cooperative game theory. In this paper, a heuristic algorithm is developed that can be embedded into an ABM to allow the agents to find coalition. The resultant coalition structures are comparable to those found by cooperative game theory solution approaches, specifically, the core. A heuristic approach is required due to the computational complexity of finding a cooperative game theory solution which limits its application to about only a score of agents. The ABM paradigm provides a platform in which simple rules and interactions between agents can produce a macro-level effect without the large computational requirements. As such, it can be an effective means for approximating cooperative game solutions for large numbers of agents. Our heuristic algorithm combines agent-based modeling and cooperative game theory to help find agent partitions that are members of a games' core solution. The accuracy of our heuristic algorithm can be determined by comparing its outcomes to the actual core solutions. This comparison achieved by developing an experiment that uses a specific example of a cooperative game called the glove game. The glove game is a type of exchange economy game. Finding the traditional cooperative game theory solutions is computationally intensive for large numbers of players because each possible partition must be compared to each possible coalition to determine the core set; hence our experiment only considers games of up to nine players. The results indicate that our heuristic approach achieves a core solution over 90% of the time for the games considered in our experiment.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that deals with gaining knowledge. It is closely related to ontology. The branch that deals with questions like "What is real?" and "What do we know?" as it provides these components. When using modeling and simulation, we usually imply that we are doing so to either apply knowledge, in particular when we are using them for training and teaching, or that we want to gain new knowledge, for example when doing analysis or conducting virtual experiments. This paper looks at the history of science to give a context to better cope with the question, how we can gain knowledge from simulation. It addresses aspects of computability and the general underlying mathematics, and applies the findings to validation and verification and development of federations. As simulations are understood as computable executable hypotheses, validation can be understood as hypothesis testing and theory building. The mathematical framework allows furthermore addressing some challenges when developing federations and the potential introduction of contradictions when composing different theories, as they are represented by the federated simulation systems.