ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2025
Comparison of Large Language Model with Aphasia.
Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Energy landscapes and synergetic state transitions in frustrated Stuart-Landau oscillator networks: a homotopy continuation study.Frontiers in network physiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of Large Language Model with Aphasia.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) respond fluently but often inaccurately, which resembles aphasia in humans. Does this behavioral similarity indicate any resemblance in internal information processing between LLMs and aphasic humans? Here, we address this question by comparing the network dynamics between LLMs-ALBERT, GPT-2, Llama-3.1 and one Japanese variant of Llama-and various aphasic brains. Using energy landscape analysis, we quantify how frequently the network activity pattern is likely to move from one state to another (transition frequency) and how long it tends to dwell in each state (dwelling time). First, by investigating the frequency spectrums of these two indices for brain dynamics, we find that the degrees of the polarization of the transition frequency and dwelling time enable accurate classification of receptive aphasia, expressive aphasia and controls: receptive aphasia shows the bimodal distributions for both indices, whereas expressive aphasia exhibits the most uniform distributions. In parallel, we identify highly polarized distributions in both transition frequency and dwelling time in the network dynamics in the four LLMs. These findings indicate the similarity in internal information processing between LLMs and receptive aphasia, and the current approach can provide a novel diagnosis and classification tool for LLMs and help their performance improve.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.