arXiv subjects

Suraj Biswas

Publications and source records attributed to Suraj Biswas.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Is It You or Your Environment? A Bayesian Inference Framework for Genomically-Anchored Personalized Physiological Interpretation

Personalized health AI systems face a fundamental cold-start problem: machine learning models for physiological interpretation require weeks of individual behavioral data before they can distinguish constitutional variation from environmentally driven deviation. We propose a solution grounded in causal inference and Bayesian prior design. An individual's genomic profile serves as an exogenous genetic anchor -- a domain-informed, personalized prior that is fixed at conception, immune to reverse causation, and available before a single behavioral observation is collected. The anchor initializes a Bayesian belief state over an individual's physiological set point G-hat = mu + sum(beta_i * g_i), where beta_i are GWAS-derived effect sizes and g_i are risk-allele counts. Each incoming physiological measurement P produces a non-constitutional deviation delta = P - G-hat that separates the signal attributable to environment and state from the constitutionally fixed baseline. As behavioral data accrue, the prior decays according to G-hat_t = w(t)*G-hat_genomic + [1-w(t)]*P-bar_t, transitioning from genome-dominated to empirical-baseline-dominated inference. The same observed HRV of 55 ms generates a suppression hypothesis for a person whose prior predicts 80 ms, and an enhancement hypothesis for a person whose prior predicts 30 ms -- a reversal impossible without a personalized anchor. We develop this architecture across six physiological domains, grading genomic priors by evidence strength, distinguishing robustly replicated anchors (FTO, FADS1/2, FKBP5) from contested candidate genes (SLC6A4, MAOA, DRD2). We address the inference boundary between association, Mendelian randomization, and individual token causation, and define four constraints for deployment: evidence-graded priors, dynamic decay, ancestry-matched effect sizes, and attribution rather than deterministic output.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Correlation Is Not Enough: Embedding Human Metadata for Individual Causal Discovery

Ask a pretrained biomedical language model whether "cortisol 28 ug/dL" and "stock-market volatility" are related, and it returns a cosine similarity of 0.83 on a scale where 1.0 means identical. The two share no mechanism. This is not a corner case: every off-the-shelf biomedical encoder we tested (BioBERT, PubMedBERT, BioM-ELECTRA) scores unrelated cross-domain pairs between 0.76 and 0.92 when the answer should be near zero. Accuracy on cross-domain discrimination is 0%. Retrieval systems survive this, because a language model downstream filters the noise. A Large Behavioural Model (LBM), a foundation model whose subject is a person rather than a sentence, does not: it reasons over a graph of a user's life and treats embedding proximity as evidence that two events are causally linked. False proximity writes a false causal edge, and everything downstream inherits the error. Here, embedding geometry is not a tuning knob; it is correctness. We report the fix. A contrastive pass over 72,034 pairs raises PubMedBERT BIOSSES correlation from 0.633 to 0.828 and within-vs-across-domain separation from 1.05x to 1.63x. A second pass, BODHI, mines hard negatives from edges absent in a biomedical knowledge graph and lifts separation to 2.30x and the discrimination gap to +0.392, at a 4.5% BIOSSES cost. On an Intel Xeon 6737P with AMX, OpenVINO cuts single-query latency from 1367 ms to 10 ms (133x) and reaches 555 sentences/sec. One finding contradicts standard advice: FP16 beats INT8 on this silicon at every serving batch size, and we explain why. The same model on a no-AMX Ice Lake instance runs 13-27x slower. We release the benchmark suite, training corpora, the BODHI generator, and the OpenVINO scripts.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

You Are in Control of Your State: Why Human Outcomes Are Controllable Through Causal State Intervention

A central puzzle for the behavioural sciences and for human-facing artificial intelligence is the persistence of within-person variability. The same individual, presented with the same observable input, produces different outcomes on different occasions, and different individuals produce divergent outcomes that no observable covariate fully predicts. We argue that this variability belongs in the dynamic latent state of the person, and that human outcomes are controllable in a precise and operational sense through interventions that target the state and its weighting at the moment a decision is being formed. We define a state as the time-indexed weighting vector over the dimensions that govern how an individual's biology, physiology, and neuropsychology process the next event into a decision and an outcome. The relationship between state, decision, and outcome is causal rather than correlational. The weighting vector is dynamic at sub-daily timescales. The conscious channel through which outcomes are reportable is a narrow attentional bottleneck whose contents are themselves state-dependent. Taken together, these claims imply that the outcome of a given event is controllable, conditionally, on the state-trajectory at the time of intervention. We motivate the framework with six strands of established evidence (causal inference, predictive processing, allostasis, attentional bottleneck, chronobiology, computational psychiatry) and a 24-month observational base from a deployed behavioural platform spanning more than 200,000 consented users across four occupational personas (research period 2023 to 2026). We derive seven testable predictions, list six operational requirements for state-aware systems, and discuss implications for digital health, education, AI personalisation, and personal agency.

cs.AI↗