Computational cognitive models are a fundamental tool in behavioral neuroscience.

Computational cognitive models are a fundamental tool in behavioral neuroscience. They embody in software precise hypotheses about the cognitive mechanisms underlying a particular behavior. Constructing these models is typically a difficult iterative process that requires both inspiration from the literature and the creativity of an individual researcher. Here, we adopt an alternative approach to learn parsimonious cognitive models directly from data. We fit behavior data using a recurrent neural network that is penalized for carrying excess information between timesteps, leading to sparse, interpretable representations and dynamics. When fitting synthetic behavioral data from known cognitive models, our method recovers the underlying form of those models. When fit to choice data from rats performing a bandit task, our method recovers simple and interpretable models that make testable predictions about neural mechanisms.

Although large language models (LLMs) hold significant promise in psychotherapy, their direct application in patient-facing scenarios raises ethical and safety concerns. Therefore, this work shifts towards developing an LLM as a supervisor to train real therapists. In addition to the privacy of clinical therapist training data, a fundamental contradiction complicates the training of therapeutic behaviors: clear feedback standards are necessary to ensure a controlled training system, yet there is no absolute "gold standard" for appropriate therapeutic behaviors in practice. In contrast, many common therapeutic mistakes are universal and identifiable, making them effective triggers for targeted feedback that can serve as clearer evidence. Motivated by this, we create a novel therapist-training paradigm: (1) guidelines for mistaken behaviors and targeted correction strategies are first established as standards; (2) a human-in-the-loop dialogue-feedback dataset is then constructed, where a mistake-prone agent intentionally makes standard mistakes during interviews naturally, and a supervisor agent locates and identifies mistakes and provides targeted feedback; (3) after fine-tuning on this dataset, the final supervisor model is provided for real therapist training. The detailed experimental results of automated, human and downstream assessments demonstrate that models fine-tuned on our dataset MATE, can provide high-quality feedback according to the clinical guideline, showing significant potential for the therapist training scenario.

Value trade-offs are an integral part of human decision-making and language use, however, current tools for interpreting such dynamic and multi-faceted notions of values in LLMs are limited. In cognitive science, so-called "cognitive models" provide formal accounts of such trade-offs in humans, by modeling the weighting of a speaker's competing utility functions in choosing an action or utterance. Here we use a leading cognitive model of polite speech to systematically evaluate value trade-offs in two encompassing model settings: degrees of reasoning "effort" in frontier black-box models, and RL post-training dynamics of open-source models. Our results highlight patterns of higher informational utility than social utility in reasoning models' default behavior, and demonstrate that these patterns shift in predictable ways when models are prompted to prioritize certain goals over others. Our findings from LLMs' training dynamics suggest large shifts in utility values early on in training with persistent effects of the choice of base model and pretraining data, compared to feedback dataset or alignment method. Our framework offers a flexible tool for probing value trade-offs across diverse model types, providing insights for generating hypotheses about other social behaviors such as sycophancy and for shaping training regimes that better control trade-offs between values during model development.

First provide a summary of the paper, and then address the following criteria: Quality, clarity, originality and significance. Summary: This very strong paper proposes a rational model for algorithm selection based on problem features and Bayesian regression. The model is shown to be effective computationally and to better predict human performance than comparable models. This paper is the epitome of a strong NIPS paper. The paper is clearly written and addresses an interesting problem. There is both a nice computational result about the algorithm and a cognitive model that is tested with a brief experiment.

As machine learning systems increasingly inform critical decisions, the need for human-understandable explanations grows. Current evaluations of Explainable AI (XAI) often prioritize technical fidelity over cognitive accessibility which critically affects users, in particular those with visual impairments. We propose CUE, a model for Cognitive Understanding of Explanations, linking explanation properties to cognitive sub-processes: legibility (perception), readability (comprehension), and interpretability (interpretation). In a study (N=455) testing heatmaps with varying col-ormaps (BWR, Cividis, Coolwarm), we found comparable task performance but lower confidence/effort for visually impaired users. Unlike expected, these gaps were not mitigated and sometimes worsened by accessibility-focused color maps like Cividis. These results challenge assumptions about perceptual optimization and support the need for adaptive XAI interfaces. They also validate CUE by demonstrating that altering explanation legibility affects understandability. We contribute: (1) a formalized cognitive model for explanation understanding, (2) an integrated definition of human-centered explanation properties, and (3) empirical evidence motivating accessible, user-tailored XAI.

It takes several years for the developing brain of a baby to fully master word repetition -- the task of hearing a word and repeating it aloud. Repeating a new word, such as from a new language, can be a challenging task also for adults. Additionally, brain damage, such as from a stroke, may lead to systematic speech errors with specific characteristics dependent on the location of the brain damage. Cognitive sciences suggest a model with various components for the different processing stages involved in word repetition. While some studies have begun to localize the corresponding regions in the brain, the neural mechanisms and how exactly the brain performs word repetition remain largely unknown. We propose to bridge the gap between the cognitive model of word repetition and neural mechanisms in the human brain by modeling the task using deep neural networks. Neural models are fully observable, allowing us to study the detailed mechanisms in their various substructures and make comparisons with human behavior and, ultimately, the brain. Here, we make first steps in this direction by: (1) training a large set of models to simulate the word repetition task; (2) creating a battery of tests to probe the models for known effects from behavioral studies in humans, and (3) simulating brain damage through ablation studies, where we systematically remove neurons from the model, and repeat the behavioral study to examine the resulting speech errors in the "patient" model. Our results show that neural models can mimic several effects known from human research, but might diverge in other aspects, highlighting both the potential and the challenges for future research aimed at developing human-like neural models.

We introduce automated scientific minimization of regret (ASMR) -- a framework for automated computational cognitive science. Building on the principles of scientific regret minimization, ASMR leverages Centaur -- a recently proposed foundation model of human cognition -- to identify gaps in an interpretable cognitive model. These gaps are then addressed through automated revisions generated by a language-based reasoning model. We demonstrate the utility of this approach in a multi-attribute decision-making task, showing that ASMR discovers cognitive models that predict human behavior at noise ceiling while retaining interpretability. Taken together, our results highlight the potential of ASMR to automate core components of the cognitive modeling pipeline.

A central goal of cognitive modeling is to develop models that not only predict human behavior but also provide insight into the underlying cognitive mechanisms. While neural network models trained on large-scale behavioral data often achieve strong predictive performance, they typically fall short in offering interpretable explanations of the cognitive processes they capture. In this work, we explore the potential of pretrained large language models (LLMs) to serve as dual-purpose cognitive models--capable of both accurate prediction and interpretable explanation in natural language. Specifically, we employ reinforcement learning with outcome-based rewards to guide LLMs toward generating explicit reasoning traces for explaining human risky choices. Our findings demonstrate that this approach produces high-quality explanations alongside strong quantitative predictions of human decisions.