The Pinocchio Dimension: Phenomenality of Experience as the Primary Axis of LLM Psychometric Differences

We administer 45 validated psychometric questionnaires to 50 large language models (LLMs) to identify the dimensions along which LLMs differ psychometrically. Using Supervised Semantic Differential (SSD), we find that the primary axis of between-model variance separates items describing phenomenally rich experience, including embodied sensation, felt affect, inner speech, imagery, and empathy, from items describing stimulus-driven behavioral reactivity ($R^2_{adj}=.037$, $p<.0001$). To test this hypothesis at the item level, we introduce the Pinocchio score ($π_i$), the ratio of inter-model response variance under neutral prompting to that under a human-simulation prompt, as an annotation-free measure of each item's experiential demand. $π_i$ predicts condition-induced shifts in primary factor loading magnitudes ($ρ=-.215$, $p<.0001$, $n=1292$--$1310$ items), confirming that between-model divergence on experiential items is structured rather than noisy. Applying PCA to per-model EFA scores across all questionnaires reveals one dominant dimension, the Pinocchio Axis ($Π$): the degree to which a model presents itself as a locus of phenomenal experience rather than a system of behavioral responses. This axis captures 47.1% of cross-questionnaire between-model variance in primary factor scores and converges with item-level Pinocchio scores ($r=.864$). Marked within-provider divergence across closely related model variants is consistent with post-training fine-tuning as a key contributor, supporting the interpretation that $Π$ reflects a training-shaped self-representational tendency governing how a model treats experiential language as self-applicable. The dominant axis of between-model psychometric variation is therefore not a conventional personality trait but a self-representational stance toward one's own nature as an experiencer.

Computational Phenomenology of Temporal Experience in Autism: Quantifying the Emotional and Narrative Characteristics of Lived Unpredictability

Disturbances in temporality, such as desynchronization with the social environment and its unpredictability, are considered core features of autism with a deep impact on relationships. However, limitations regarding research on this issue include: 1) the dominance of deficit-based medical models of autism, 2) sample size in qualitative research, and 3) the lack of phenomenological anchoring in computational research. To bridge the gap between phenomenological and computational approaches and overcome sample-size limitations, our research integrated three methodologies. Study A: structured phenomenological interviews with autistic individuals using the Transdiagnostic Assessment of Temporal Experience. Study B: computational analysis of an autobiographical corpus of autistic narratives built for this purpose. Study C: a replication of a computational study using narrative flow measures to assess the perceived phenomenological authenticity of autistic autobiographies. Interviews revealed that the most significant differences between the autistic and control groups concerned unpredictability of experience. Computational results mirrored these findings: the temporal lexicon in autistic narratives was significantly more negatively valenced - particularly the "Immediacy & Suddenness" category. Outlier analysis identified terms associated with perceived discontinuity (unpredictably, precipitously, and abruptly) as highly negative. The computational analysis of narrative flow found that the autistic narratives contained within the corpus quantifiably resemble autobiographical stories more than imaginary ones. Overall, the temporal challenges experienced by autistic individuals were shown to primarily concern lived unpredictability and stem from the contents of lived experience, and not from autistic narrative construction.

Patterns vs. Patients: Evaluating LLMs against Mental Health Professionals on Personality Disorder Diagnosis through First-Person Narratives

Growing reliance on LLMs for psychiatric self-assessment raises questions about their ability to interpret qualitative patient narratives. We present the first direct comparison between state-of-the-art LLMs and mental health professionals in diagnosing Borderline (BPD) and Narcissistic (NPD) Personality Disorders utilizing Polish-language first-person autobiographical accounts. We show that the top-performing Gemini Pro models surpassed human professionals in overall diagnostic accuracy by 21.91 percentage points (65.48% vs. 43.57%). While both models and human experts excelled at identifying BPD (F1 = 83.4 & F1 = 80.0, respectively), models severely underdiagnosed NPD (F1 = 6.7 vs. 50.0), showing a reluctance toward the value-laden term "narcissism." Qualitatively, models provided confident, elaborate justifications focused on patterns and formal categories, while human experts remained concise and cautious, emphasizing the patient's sense of self and temporal experience. Our findings demonstrate that while LLMs are highly competent at interpreting complex first-person clinical data, they remain subject to critical reliability and bias issues.

Two Approaches to Diachronic Normalization of Polish Texts

This paper discusses two approaches to the diachronic normalization of Polish texts: a rule-based solution that relies on a set of handcrafted patterns, and a neural normalization model based on the text-to-text transfer transformer architecture. The training and evaluation data prepared for the task are discussed in detail, along with experiments conducted to compare the proposed normalization solutions. A quantitative and qualitative analysis is made. It is shown that at the current stage of inquiry into the problem, the rule-based solution outperforms the neural one on 3 out of 4 variants of the prepared dataset, although in practice both approaches have distinct advantages and disadvantages.