Jie Liang, Zhengxin Yu, Hamid Nasiri +1cs.AI cs.CL
LLM agents need to sustain goal-consistent reasoning across long multi-turn interactions under strict resource constraints. However, as the multi-turn context accumulates, it can destabilize the underlying LLM's internal representation of task-relevant information from earlier turns, blurring the boundary between constructive reasoning and representation drift. We formulate multi-turn reasoning as a hidden-state trajectory of the underlying LLM that is characterized via two complementary signals: temporal curvature that captures the directional consistency of turn-to-turn updates, and variance slope which measures the expansion or contraction of the exploration space. Across four tasks and three underlying LLMs, we observed that these geometric signals distinguish between correct and incorrect episodes prior to completion. We further decompose each episode into three-action chains formed from four actions (Read, Write, Respond, Transfer) and show that separability is action-dependent, with different signals distinguishing various chain patterns. Our experiments demonstrate that trajectory geometry can identify critical turns in the reasoning process, increasing task success rates on $τ$-Bench from 24.1% to 39.6% while reducing token cost by 11.2%.
Mojtaba Faramarzi, Alex Lamb, Irina Rishcs.LG cs.CV
Diffusion architectures now encompass convolutional UNets as well as transformer-based designs such as Diffusion Transformers (DiTs), inspired by Vision Transformers (ViTs), yet the effects of structured geometric perturbations within these architectures remain poorly understood. We study this question through a unified framework that applies reflection-based elements of the dihedral group to intermediate hidden states as controlled internal interventions, contrasting geometrically consistent and inconsistent variants. Using activation-level diagnostics, including Self-Consistency Shift (SCS), Activation Mass Scatter (AMS), and Drift, we analyze feature stability and geometric drift. We find that consistent transformations improve stability, while inconsistent ones induce predictable, architecture-specific failures. In the main Stable Diffusion 2.1 U-Net study, we evaluate seven intervention modes over three seeds and complement the internal diagnostics with image-level FID, KID, CLIP score, and LPIPS diversity. Taken together with supporting ViT and controlled DiT analyses, these results establish geometric consistency as a key principle for stable hidden-state interventions in spatially structured vision and diffusion models.
Long-horizon LLM agents can fail quietly: they settle on one reading of the evidence early, then spend the rest of the run defending it. We call this premature commitment. Final-answer scoring misses the failure mode because it sees only the answer, not whether the process has already collapsed to a stable path. We define representational commitment as cross-run hidden-state convergence at a fixed reasoning step, and use it as an early diagnostic of trajectory consistency. On Llama-3.1-70B running ReAct on HotpotQA, step-4 hidden-state similarity predicts downstream behavioral consistency (r = -0.35, partial r = -0.45), with a localized temporal and layer-wise signature. The signal replicates across Qwen-2.5-72B and Phi-3-14B, and on StrategyQA (r = -0.83). It does not track correctness: committed-wrong and committed-correct questions are not separable in activation similarity. That boundary is central to the claim. Commitment tells us whether an agent has settled, not whether it is right. A runtime monitor detects inconsistent trajectories from hidden states at AUROC up to 0.97 (0.85--0.88 under a stricter split), and a prompting intervention cuts behavioral variance by 28% against a token-matched control while leaving accuracy statistically unchanged. We also test whether the signal can route self-consistency compute; on a harder benchmark it helps only modestly and is matched by a simpler output-based baseline. The result is a diagnostic for a hidden process failure, with clear limits rather than a general accuracy lever.