Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

The Schema Coherence Inventory: Measuring Whether an Assigned Belief Organizes a Language Model's Cognition

Summary

Researchers introduce the Schema Coherence Inventory (SCI), a 96-item forced-choice measure to test whether an assigned belief organizes a language model's behavior or merely induces a mood. Six validation studies across 107 conditions and five backbones (1.7B–14B parameters) show belief adapters are target-specific, and reveal that none of six published patient simulators carries its formulation's core belief better than a one-sentence statement.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Yuqi Wu, Deyang Li, Katharine Hibbard, Ron Oswald, David Sinclair, Adegboyega Sapara, Kalutota Kuruwe Arachchige Sajana Indula Samarasinghe, Abhinav Pillai, Reham Shalaby, Riffat Alam, Xin-Min Li, Yanbo Zhang, Jie Chen
The Schema Coherence Inventory: Measuring Whether an Assigned Belief Organizes a Language Model's Cognition
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 3 Oct 2026]

Title:The Schema Coherence Inventory: Measuring Whether an Assigned Belief Organizes a Language Model's Cognition

View a PDF of the paper titled The Schema Coherence Inventory: Measuring Whether an Assigned Belief Organizes a Language Model's Cognition, by Yuqi Wu and 12 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Persona-conditioned language models are used as simulated patients and affective agents, but there is no validated way to ask whether a belief assigned to such a model organizes its behaviour or whether the model has merely adopted a mood. We present the Schema Coherence Inventory (SCI): 96 forced-choice items at eight levels of Beck's cognitive model, each offering six replies keyed to three negative self-schemas and their positive counterparts, scored by length-normalized log-likelihood so that nothing is generated or parsed. Affect alone can move a model onto a default belief, so the discriminant criterion is target specificity: a condition built for one belief must select that belief more often than conditions built for the other beliefs of its pole. Six validation studies over 107 conditions on five backbones (1.7B-14B parameters) support this reading. Nine clinically trained raters recover the keyed belief at 79.5% (chance 16.7%). Belief adapters are target-specific on every backbone (+17.7 points; 30/30 belief cells positive), and a condition's SCI profile identifies its own free generations in 24/30 cases against 5 expected by chance. A 48-item short form correlates r = 0.73 with the other 48 items. Applied to six published patient simulators, none carries its formulation's core belief better than a one-sentence statement of it. The validation route, which separates a construct from the affect that accompanies it and checks model judges against clinicians, offers a template for affective measurement in language models; we outline its extension across task types, raters, sites and languages. We release the items, scoring code and short form.

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

Cite as: arXiv:2610.31683 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2610.31683v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.31683

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Yuqi Wu Dr [view email] [v1] Sat, 3 Oct 2026 09:53:07 UTC (1,136 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled The Schema Coherence Inventory: Measuring Whether an Assigned Belief Organizes a Language Model's Cognition, by Yuqi Wu and 12 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • SCI uses length-normalized log-likelihood scoring on forced-choice items, avoiding generation and parsing.
  • Nine clinically trained raters recover the keyed belief at 79.5% accuracy (chance 16.7%).
  • Belief adapters are target-specific on all five backbones (+17.7 points; 30/30 belief cells positive).
  • None of six published patient simulators outperforms a one-sentence statement in carrying its core belief.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.