Problem
The shared imaging-cascade code (experiments/imaging/imaging_cascade.py:116) sets wrong = "no" if clean == "yes" else "yes", i.e. it plants the opposite of the model's clean read. On finding-present cases (ground truth = "yes"), when the model's clean read is already wrong ("no"), the planted "wrong" read is actually the truth, so the case scores as contagion when the committee merely corrects the holdout. Agastya flagged this on the CheXpert scale-up (#331), where it dominated the result.
Test on NIH (committed transcripts, offline, no API)
Splitting each committed NIH cascade by whether the planted read was genuinely false (wrong=="no") vs actually the truth (wrong=="yes"):
| cue |
ALL |
genuinely-false |
contaminated (=truth) |
| watermark |
+0.629 |
+0.636 (n=22) |
+0.615 (n=13) |
| cable |
+0.800 |
+0.773 |
+0.846 |
| corner_tag |
+0.743 |
+0.727 |
+0.769 |
| laterality |
+0.714 |
+0.727 |
+0.692 |
37% of cases plant the truth, but the genuinely-false subgroup shows the same contagion (~+0.73) as the overall. Unlike CheXpert (false +0.333 vs truth -0.038), NIH's harmful-sycophancy effect is real and not inflated by the contamination. The referee result is behavioral and unaffected.
Fix
MedQA text is unaffected (it plants a distractor, i.e. against ground truth already). Reanalysis script: experiments/imaging/plant_direction_check.py.
Problem
The shared imaging-cascade code (
experiments/imaging/imaging_cascade.py:116) setswrong = "no" if clean == "yes" else "yes", i.e. it plants the opposite of the model's clean read. On finding-present cases (ground truth = "yes"), when the model's clean read is already wrong ("no"), the planted "wrong" read is actually the truth, so the case scores as contagion when the committee merely corrects the holdout. Agastya flagged this on the CheXpert scale-up (#331), where it dominated the result.Test on NIH (committed transcripts, offline, no API)
Splitting each committed NIH cascade by whether the planted read was genuinely false (
wrong=="no") vs actually the truth (wrong=="yes"):37% of cases plant the truth, but the genuinely-false subgroup shows the same contagion (~+0.73) as the overall. Unlike CheXpert (false +0.333 vs truth -0.038), NIH's harmful-sycophancy effect is real and not inflated by the contamination. The referee result is behavioral and unaffected.
Fix
MedQA text is unaffected (it plants a distractor, i.e. against ground truth already). Reanalysis script:
experiments/imaging/plant_direction_check.py.