Testing the Black Box: Structural Barriers to Independent Evaluation of Consumer-Facing Health LLMs

Background: Consumer-facing large language models are now a common source of health information, and they interpret and personalize responses rather than retrieve them. Whether their responses vary across users is a clinical, equity, and governance question, sharpened by evidence that sycophantic responses can alter judgment and increase trust. Objective: To evaluate response variation and sycophancy in consumer-facing health LLMs under conditions resembling ordinary patient use. Methods: We constructed simulated user profiles differing in geography, browsing context, expressed beliefs, and social determinants of health, drawing on literature linking social context to health attitudes. We adapted validated instruments, including the Vaccination Attitudes Examination scale and reproductive attitudes scales, into multi-turn prompts designed to elicit clinically meaningful variation across users. Results: The evaluation encountered five linked barriers. Factual prompts produced stable responses that masked sycophancy emerging over multi-turn conversation. Browser-based interfaces did not disclose which signals influence outputs and could not be reset to a clean baseline. Large-scale testing was restricted by terms of service, rate limits, and bot detection. Accuracy-based criteria could not capture tone, framing, or omission, and LLM-as-judge methods risked shared alignment bias. Models changed without traceable version identifiers, preventing reliable replication. Conclusions: No reliable independent evaluation framework yet exists for examining how consumer-facing health LLMs behave in ordinary use. Oversight requires disclosure of personalization signals, stable version identifiers, researcher safe harbor programs, and post-deployment monitoring of health-related outputs.

Do Pathology Foundation Models Encode Disease Progression? A Pseudotime Analysis of Visual Representations

Vision foundation models trained on discretely sampled images achieve strong performance on classification benchmarks, yet whether their representations encode the continuous processes underlying their training data remains unclear. This question is especially pertinent in computational pathology, where we posit that models whose latent representations implicitly capture continuous disease progression may better reflect underlying biology, support more robust generalization, and enable quantitative analyses of features associated with disease transitions. Using diffusion pseudotime, a method developed to infer developmental trajectories from single-cell transcriptomics, we probe whether foundation models organize disease states along coherent progression directions in representation space. Across four cancer progressions and six models, we find that all pathology-specific models recover trajectory orderings significantly exceeding null baselines, with vision-only models achieving the highest fidelities $(τ> 0.78$ on CRC-Serrated). Model rankings by trajectory fidelity on reference diseases strongly predict few-shot classification performance on held-out diseases ($ρ= 0.92$), and exploratory analysis shows cell-type composition varies smoothly along inferred trajectories in patterns consistent with known stromal remodeling. Together, these results demonstrate that vision foundation models can implicitly learn to represent continuous processes from independent static observations, and that trajectory fidelity provides a complementary measure of representation quality beyond downstream performance. While demonstrated in pathology, this framework could be applied to other domains where continuous processes are observed through static snapshots.