question

active

question:do-distinctions-in-estimates-remain-robust-across-diverse-tom-stimuli-in-repeated-large-scale-trials

Do distinctions in Φ estimates remain robust across diverse ToM stimuli in repeated large-scale trials?

Criterion 2 operationalization: requires p<0.05 in Wilcoxon tests across score categories.

Source paper

extracted_from

Can "consciousness" be observed from large language model (LLM) internal states? Dissecting LLM representations obtained from Theory of Mind test with Integrated Information Theory and Span Representation analysis

(2025) · Li, Jingkai

Neighborhood — ranked by edge-count

Claims (1)

claim

Sequences of contemporary Transformer-based LLM representations lack statistically significant indicators of observed 'consciousness' phenomena under the three stringent criteria.
gates
Primary conclusion of the study based on temporal permutation analysis failing all three criteria.

Related by similarity (8)

cosine ≥ 0.65 · no typed edge

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

Can estimates of Φ, the primary metric of IIT, robustly differentiate responses across distinct ToM performance levels?question0.834
Criterion 1 operationalization: requires >80% 'good' cases (higher score → higher Φ) per ToM task.
Criterion 2: Statistically significant Φ value differences (p<0.05) across ToM score categories via Wilcoxon test.concept0.782
Second of three operational criteria; requires distributional significance in IIT estimates across performance levels.
Criterion 1: Φ estimates must yield >80% 'good' cases (higher score → higher Φ) per ToM task to indicate potential consciousness.concept0.770
First of three operational criteria for identifying consciousness phenomena in LLM representations.
Can IIT estimates provide a stronger basis for interpreting variations in ToM performance than Span Representation, independent of any consciousness estimate?question0.762
Criterion 3 operationalization: requires IIT mean AUC to exceed Span Representation mean AUC.
Variations in ToM test score categories are more likely attributed to span-level information of the LLM representation sequence rather than to a 'consciousness' phenomenon as suggested by IIT estimates.claim0.756
Main interpretive finding from Criterion 3 comparison showing Span Representation consistently outperforms IIT under temporal permutation.
If 'consciousness' phenomenon can be observed from ToM-related RN, higher ToM test scores should yield higher values of μΦmax (IIT 3.0) and/or μΦ (IIT 4.0).hypothesis0.751
Specific prediction linking IIT's prediction of high Φ for good performance to the experimental design's scoring structure.
Whether conclusions about latent reflection directions generalize to larger LLMs, different architectures, or broader datasets remains to be verified.question0.735
Key limitation and open question about experimental scope.
None of the cases identified under temporal permutation satisfy the Criterion 1 threshold of >80% 'good' cases for any ToM task.finding0.733
Even the rare cases where good > bad do not reach the 80% significance threshold required by Criterion 1.