Are Language Models Models?

Kari Jaaskelainen

16 Jan 2026 — 1 min read

New paper by Philip Resnik asks a simple question: are today’s language models (like ChatGPT) actually models of how the human mind works?

Implementation level: No. Brains and LMs are built and operate very differently.
Algorithmic/representational level: Weak support. We lack good evidence that LMs use the same steps or mental representations people do.
Computational theory level: Also problematic. It’s unclear that LMs are solving the same problem the mind is.

Resnik’s conclusion: LMs are powerful tools for studying language and behavior, but calling them full cognitive models overstates the case and feeds AI hype.

Use LMs to do science, not to shortcut explanations of the mind.

Read more: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.10421v1

Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.10421v1

Register: https://www.AiFeta.com

#AI #LanguageModels #CognitiveScience #MarrsLevels #Research #LLMs #SciComm

Read more

Meet GRACE: a moral governor for safer, more transparent AI

Meet GRACE: a moral governor for safer, more transparent AI

AI agents are getting powerful—so how do we make sure they do the right thing, not just the effective thing? Meet GRACE, a reason-based moral governor that keeps AI behavior aligned with human norms by separating moral reasoning from goal-driven decision-making. * Moral Module: uses deontic logic and explicit reasons

Why some fine-tuned LLMs miss phishing—and how to fix it

Why some fine-tuned LLMs miss phishing—and how to fix it

Not all fine-tuned LLMs spot phishing equally. A new study tests Llama 3.1 8B, Gemma 2 9B, and Mistral on high-stakes phishing detection—and uses SHAP and mechanistic interpretability to reveal why models do (or don’t) generalize. * Architecture × data diversity matters: Gemma 2 9B hits state-of-the-art performance (F1

AI that explains itself—by following the science

AI that explains itself—by following the science

AI that explains itself—by following the science Black-box AI can be powerful, but it often can’t tell us why it made a decision. Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) try to fix that by predicting human-understandable concepts first, then the final answer. The catch: standard CBMs ignore domain-specific cause-and-effect and

Meet GenomAgent: A Team of AI Specialists for Smarter Genomics Q&A

Meet GenomAgent: A Team of AI Specialists for Smarter Genomics Q&A

TL;DR: Finding reliable answers in genomics is hard. GenomAgent turns one big AI into a coordinating team of specialists—and beats the current leader by 12% on a key benchmark. Genomic facts live across many databases. Standard chatbots struggle because they can’t flexibly query those sources. GeneGPT added