Kevin Du, Alexander Hoyle, Laura Ruis +1cs.CL cs.LG
Reasoning traces from chain-of-thought models appear to offer a legible window into how a model arrives at its answer. A growing body of work treats them as such, using LLM judges to diagnose errors, evaluate faithfulness, and provide step-level supervision via process reward models and generative critics. These practices rely on the text of a reasoning step carrying information about its functional role. But does the text actually encode information about which reasoning steps matter? We operationalize the importance of a reasoning step as its advantage: the change in expected reward, e.g., producing the correct final answer, from including that step, estimated via Monte Carlo rollouts. Basing ground truth on these estimates, we evaluate whether LLM judges can identify high-advantage steps and find that sufficiently capable LLMs can outperform a prevalence baseline but fall well short of a noise ceiling. Fine-tuning a model as a step-level critic yields strong improvement for incorrect responses but remains distant from ceiling for correct responses, suggesting that step importance is only partially recoverable from the text of the reasoning trace. Our findings contribute to a growing body of chain-of-thought faithfulness work that cautions against treating the legibility of reasoning traces as interpretability, especially with implications for process reward modeling.
Research and news coverage of language-model deception increasingly attributes human-like mental-state concepts to language models. Such claims can blur the distinction between behavior that looks deceptive and a mechanism that is actually deceptive. We introduce a causal taxonomy separating prior commitment from retrospective report, model preference from realized output, false preference from sensitivity to the utility of misleading a recipient, and deceptive behavior from the provenance of the objective or strategy producing it. We test these distinctions in two open-weight model families. Across controlled guessing-game and stock-trading experiments, we find that deceptive-looking behavior can arise without the corresponding proposed mechanism, while other interventions provide direct evidence that recipient information state can causally affect deceptive preference. These results show that deceptive behavior can provide evidence for a deceptive mechanism. But even evidence for such a mechanism does not establish model agency in the deception.
Hasan Alkhder, Mohammad Abboush, Igor Tchappi +2cs.CL cs.AI
Neural machine translation (NMT) systems typically produce a single output per input, obscuring the alternative decision trajectories implicitly available within multilingual decoding. This opacity becomes particularly problematic in low-resource dialect settings, where multiple linguistically valid realizations may differ in lexical authenticity, register, and structural stability. We propose reframing translation as a structured decision space explored by autonomous translation agents. Instead of analyzing a single output, we model distinct translation pathways as agents operating over a shared multilingual backbone. Inter-agent divergence is treated not as error but as an interpretable behavioral signal. We conduct an empirical study on Turkish--Syrian Arabic translation using three agents: (1) zero-shot direct translation, (2) dialect-stabilized translation via lightweight fine-tuning, and (3) pivot translation through English. Evaluation is performed on 5,000 dialogue sentences, while stabilization is trained on 5,000 additional Turkish--Syrian sentence pairs drawn from television dialogue and MADAR-Turk resources. Rather than optimizing for conventional performance metrics, we quantify structured behavioral displacement using dialect marker frequency, lexical proximity to standardized Arabic, and structural variance. Lightweight stabilization nearly doubles dialect marker usage, increasing it from 0.2266 to 0.4988, while significantly reducing structural instability. Pivot mediation introduces normalization pressure and measurable compression effects, whereas zero-shot translation exhibits the highest decision variance. We argue that translation divergence across agents reveals latent decision flexibility within multilingual models and we provide a principled interpretability framework for low-resource dialect generation.
Reconstruction-based anomaly detectors are accurate but opaque: a deep autoencoder flags a sample without telling a practitioner which feature ranges made it anomalous. We propose DIFFINT, an autoencoder whose latent bottleneck is structured as a set of soft, axis-aligned interval memberships learned end-to-end directly from raw numerical data, without any discretization or binarization. Each latent unit corresponds to a human-readable hyper-rectangle in feature space; an instance is encoded by how strongly it falls inside each interval relative to the other units, and its reconstruction error is the anomaly score. This keeps the power of differentiable representation learning while exposing an inspectable internal structure. We make the inductive bias precise: a certified reconstruction-error lower bound for points that fall outside every active coordinate of the learned support (with a Lipschitz-enforced decoder), and a graded, empirically verified suppression mechanism for the usual case in which only a few features are abnormal; and we provide a closed-form, label-free importance that ranks each (unit, feature) pair from quantities the model already maintains, turning trained intervals into auditable candidate constraints without ever seeing an anomaly label. On 48 ADBench benchmarks against 22 baselines under a common [-1, 1]-normalized protocol, DIFFINT attains the best mean rank overall on both metrics (4.10 on ROC-AUC, 4.16 on AUPR); among inlier-only detectors it leads its regime clearly, and it is competitive with the strongest contaminated-data detectors (see the stratified and complete-case analyses). It is the only interpretable detector in the statistically-tied leading cluster of seven methods.
Recent advances in text-to-video (T2V) diffusion models have demonstrated remarkable generative capabilities, yet their reliance on loosely curated training data raises pressing safety and copyright concerns. Concept erasure offers a principled remedy by removing unwanted semantics from pretrained models while preserving remaining concepts. However, existing approaches typically operate at a coarse granularity misaligned with the fine-grained, distributed nature of concept representations, leading to incomplete removal or degraded generation quality. We argue that surgical erasure fundamentally requires intervention at the level of monosemantic features, where each unit encodes a single interpretable concept. To this end, we propose EraseSAE, a novel framework that leverages sparse autoencoders to achieve surgical concept erasure in DiT-based T2V diffusion models via a principled decompose-attribute-erase pipeline. We first introduce the Partitioned Convolutional Sparse Autoencoder, which decomposes dense spatiotemporal activations into disentangled, interpretable sparse features while preserving spatiotemporal coherence. A contrastive attribution mechanism then contrasts activations from paired prompts to isolate concept-specific feature kernels. At inference, timestep-resolved spatiotemporal masks derived from the identified kernels confine erasure to regions where the target concept is active, leaving unrelated content intact. Extensive experiments across diverse diffusion models and concept erasure tasks demonstrate that EraseSAE achieves precise and robust concept removal with minimal quality degradation, substantially outperforming state-of-the-art methods. The code is available at https://github.com/HiDream-ai/EraseSAE.
Karthika Nhayakkat, Rajat Verma, Maharaj Brahma +4cs.CL
Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate strong multilingual reasoning performance, yet their robustness to semantics-preserving structural variation remains underexplored, particularly for relatively free word-order languages. We investigate the structural sensitivity of multilingual LLMs using two linguistically grounded perturbation settings in Hindi and Malayalam: constrained constituent reordering and active-passive voice transformation. We introduce a benchmark dataset IndicReStruct, with two variants, GSM8K-Reordered and GSM8K-Voice, constructed from GSM8K while preserving semantic meaning. Across six state-of-the-art LLMs and multiple prompting strategies, we observe consistent and significant degradation in mathematical reasoning performance under structurally perturbed inputs. To further understand these failures, we perform qualitative error analysis and mechanistic interpretability experiments using residual-stream activation patching. Our analyses show that reasoning failures frequently arise from disruptions in entity-quantity alignment and that intermediate transformer layers contribute most strongly toward reasoning restoration. Overall, our findings suggest that current multilingual LLMs remain highly sensitive to surface syntactic realization and lack robust compositional invariance under structurally different but semantically equivalent inputs.
Dun Li Chan, Emily Liu, Niyathi Allu +1cs.CL stat.ML
Language models encounter typos, corrupted text, altered words, and disrupted token order, yet robustness is usually evaluated only through output behavior. We study how six naturalistic and synthetic input perturbations propagate through decoder-only language models at three levels: output behavior, hidden-state geometry, and attention-head function. We evaluate behavioral effects across four GPT-2 and two Qwen2.5 checkpoints by analyzing layerwise geometry using centered kernel alignment and intrinsic dimension, and examine attention-head responses in GPT-2. Perturbation types produce distinguishable metric profiles that are not fully captured by output measures and are only partly consistent across the tested checkpoints. Copying scores are especially associated with activation-patching recovery under token substitution and shuffling. Gradient-guided HotFlip perturbations also cause stronger behavioral and representational disruption than rate-matched random token substitutions in GPT-2; their behavioral effects are consistent across all six tested checkpoints. Our results show that robustness claims based on a single behavioral or representational metric can be misleading, and motivate multi-level evaluation of how perturbations alter language-model computation.
Nastase et al. (2026) argue that large language models (LLMs) may illuminate language processing because both rely on distributed, context-sensitive representations shaped by statistical learning. Their rejection of simple cortical "boxology" is persuasive, and they articulate a strong case for the value of LLM-brain alignment research. The key question is what kind of inference LLM-brain alignment licenses. My claim here will be narrow: representational alignment can in principle constrain mechanistic hypotheses, but it does not by itself identify a mechanism. Nastase et al. acknowledge that an encoding model can capture features represented in neural activity without establishing a shared architecture or algorithm. Yet the authors sometime move from alignment to "shared computational principles" and ultimately to LLMs as mechanistic models of natural language. Indeed, their methodological caveat that alignment does not establish a shared architecture or algorithm sits uneasily with their conclusion that LLMs might instantiate the same computational principles as biological brains and provide a "fully mechanistic model" of language. I discuss what I consider to be problems of logical, causal, and computational underdetermination in Nastase et al.'s (2026) proposal.
Most prior works focused on conflicts between an LLM's internal parametric knowledge and externally provided context. In contrast, we investigate how LLMs handle conflicts that arise within contextual knowledge itself. We introduce a taxonomy of six types of contextual conflicts (factual, inferential, temporal, granularity, perspective, and ambiguity) and contribute a comprehensive dataset ContextConflict for this setting. The dataset contains 5,781 samples, covers both reasoning and summarization tasks, and includes both explicit contradictions and implicit conflicts that require multi-step reasoning. Experiments on nine LLMs show that current models still fall short in resolving contextual knowledge conflicts. We further provide mechanistic interpretability insights into how LLMs process such conflicts, revealing their latent awareness of conflicts and the representational geometry underlying conflict processing. In addition, our analysis uncovers a consistent model bias towards earlier evidence, and this positional preference serves as a key obstacle to effective conflict resolution. Motivated by these findings, we further propose a simple training-free, label-free steering method that steers activations to encourage a more comprehensive incorporation of evidences for better conflict resolution. On our dataset, the method consistently improves accuracy on reasoning tasks and generates higher-quality, more balanced summaries for summarization tasks.
Continuous chain-of-thought models compress reasoning into latent tokens. Matrix-valued variants, which route each latent token through a d x d matrix bottleneck, introduce rank as a single-sample structural observable on the latent matrix Z. If matrix latents carry parallel reasoning paths via superposition, rank should track them, and truncating Z to low rank should hurt accuracy on tasks whose solutions plausibly require multiple components. Across four training regimes of a matrix-CODI model (three on ProsQA, one on GSM8K-Aug below the learning threshold), the rank-k projection ablation curve is flat to within 0.6 percentage points. A three-seed replication yields 81.0 +/- 2.0 percentage points accuracy while the final effective rank of Z spans {4, 12, 13}; the loss does not reward any particular rank. To test whether rank-blindness arises from the flatten-then-project readout alone, we trained four readouts: a bilinear reparametrization, a bilinear-plus-GELU readout nonlinear in Z, an SVD-augmented readout feeding singular values through an MLP, and a quadratic readout in Z Z^T. All four rank-k curves remain flat (Spearman p-values 0.63, 0.14, 0.82, 0.46). The flat curves persist for readouts nonlinear in Z. A linear probe on Z underperforms a raw pretrained hidden state at target prediction (AUC 0.673 vs. 0.846). A negative control on vanilla GPT-2 SFT (no matrix bottleneck, no Z, three seeds, n=500) reproduces a flat rank-k curve under the same intervention paradigm with pooled-mean range 0.20pp, and a random-h sensitivity floor lands at the same accuracy: the rank-k ablation alone conflates rank-blindness with position-irrelevance.
Hybrid architectures combining Full Attention (FA) and Linear Attention (LA) are increasingly prominent, yet their allocation remains heuristic. We seek an evidence-grounded basis in head-level functional organization learned by RoPE-based Transformers. Behavioral probes do not yield a complete taxonomy, so we propose two intervention metrics: RoPE Frequency Importance Score (RFIS), measuring how each frequency affects a head's attention distribution, and RoPE Positional Dependence (RPD), isolating dependence on rotary positional modulation. On Qwen3-series models and Llama3.1, RFIS suggests and RPD verifies a complete taxonomy of retrieval and positional heads separated by a salient mid-low-frequency band. Controlled Transformers show that this boundary follows the training-length positional scale; we term it the Global Positional Band (GPBand). The analysis suggests a potential cause of zero-shot length-extrapolation failure and yields two principles: positional modeling should operate only locally, with global access through position-independent retrieval; and both functions should be assigned at head granularity with layer-specific allocation. We instantiate them in Head-wise Hybrid Architecture (HwH), using NoPE FA for global retrieval and LA for local positional modeling. With an FA-to-LA ratio below 1:3, HwH retains strong language modeling and commonsense reasoning while improving retrieval and substantially strengthening zero-shot long-context extrapolation over Transformer, LA, and a layer-wise hybrid baseline. Ablations validate both principles and component roles, highlighting principled hybrid architecture design as a promising route toward future foundation models.
Large language models can look capable of logical reasoning, but correct or incorrect answers alone tell us little about what the model represents internally. We study logical verification in five open-weight transformer models using matched valid--invalid premise--claim pairs that vary across inference families, semantic domains, templates, and difficulty levels. Despite near-chance behavioral performance, logical validity is often almost perfectly decodable from hidden states and remains strongly decodable under held-out templates, domains, and inference families. Validity also remains highly decodable on behaviorally incorrect examples in the conditions where correctness-conditioned evaluation is well defined. At the same time, exhaustive leave-one-out tests reveal clear limits to this generalization, and interventions along probe-derived validity directions have only weak, nonspecific effects compared with random controls. Our results suggest that representing validity, expressing it in behavior, and using it causally are distinct. Validity related information can be strongly decodable from a model's hidden states without being reliably expressed in its output.
Sparse mixture-of-experts (MoE) models use an independently parameterized router at each sparse layer to select experts for every token. Prior work has shown that routing decisions across depth can often be predicted from earlier routing signals, suggesting that routing is not fully independent across layers. However, the structure behind this predictability remains unclear. In this work, we provide evidence that routing-relevant states across layers share a common geometric structure that is obscured by layer-specific coordinate systems. We isolate the control subspace of each router and align these spaces into a shared canonical representation using generalized orthogonal Procrustes analysis. After alignment, a single linear transition reaches $R^2=0.39$--$0.71$ and retains 79--90\% of the predictive power of separately fitted layer-specific dynamics, indicating that much of routing-state evolution follows a reusable process across depth. We then ask whether this shared dynamics is specific to routing or simply reflects the smooth evolution of hidden representations. A matched-rank comparison shows that residual representations are often easier to predict across layers, while router-control states preserve the model's expert choices much more faithfully. This separates generic cross-layer predictability from routing-specific information. Finally, we test whether the predicted canonical states remain meaningful when used in place of native routing states. The transported states preserve local routing behavior, while learned state evolution reduces $Δ\mathrm{NLL}$ relative to simple persistence by 15.7\% on OLMoE and 6.2\% over a 10-router horizon on Phi.
Evžen Wybitul, Tim G. J. Rudner, Christian Schroeder de Wittcs.LG cs.CL
A long-held intuition in interpretability research is that representational entanglement, the sharing of structure between knowledge domains in a neural network, makes unlearning harder. While the intuition is widespread, it has never been directly tested in a controlled experiment. We present a way to do so: by repurposing Selective Gradient Masking (SGTM), we train a suite of six 254M-parameter language models on English Wikipedia with graded levels of disentanglement between biology and non-biology knowledge. Applying three standard unlearning methods to every model in the suite, we find that more disentangled models consistently achieve better retain-forget trade-offs: at a fixed level of forgetting, the most disentangled models incur roughly $4\times$ lower retain cost under two of the three methods, and $1.3\times$ lower under the third. Because our intervention changes only the model, not the data or the unlearning algorithm, this is direct evidence that representational entanglement is one of the causes of collateral damage in unlearning, as interpretability researchers have long suspected. A similar design could be used to test other structural claims from interpretability.
Toni J. B. Liu, Jiajun Bao, Yizhou Liu +4cs.LG cs.AI cs.CL stat.ML
What does a language model predict when it has few clues? The answer lurks in its unembedding geometry: a single direction of the unembedding matrix encodes the unigram distribution of the training corpus, which serves as the Bayesian prior the model falls back on when uncertain. This structure --- which we term the \emph{direction of ignorance} --- appears in all four model families examined (\texttt{Llama}, \texttt{Qwen}, \texttt{Gemma}, and \texttt{Pythia}), ranging from 0.4B to 405B parameters. Projecting the final prediction state onto this direction yields a per-token \emph{prior loading factor} $λ$, which, empirically, declines steadily as the context becomes more informative. Formally, the same projection decomposes the prediction state into two orthogonal vectors that correspond exactly to the two factors of a tempered Bayesian update: a unigram prior raised to the exponent $λ$ and a context-driven likelihood. This geometric-probabilistic interpretation calibrates $λ$, making it meaningfully comparable across model sizes and families, with larger models generally exhibiting lower prior reliance in the high-context limit. Finally, we show that the direction of ignorance is causally active: raising or lowering $λ$ at the final prediction state steers the prediction toward or away from the unigram prior in KL divergence.
Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly evaluated on complex image and video understanding tasks, yet conventional metrics primarily assess final-answer quality and reveal little about how different information sources shape the generation process. We propose a causal and temporal evaluation framework that traces the evolving roles of visual input, question text, and generated prefixes during autoregressive decoding. Grounded in a Structural Causal Model, we use interventions and backdoor adjustment to derive three step-indexed causal-drive metrics---Visual Causal Drive (VCD), Question Causal Drive (QCD), and Prefix Causal Drive (PCD)---for characterizing source-specific generation patterns without requiring reference answers. Experiments on Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct across MAVIS, LLaVA-Video-178K, and MiraData, together with cross-model validation on InternVL2-8B, reveal a consistent transition from stronger early question and visual guidance toward increasing reliance on generated prefixes. Randomized-intervention validation shows that QCD and PCD reduce recovery error over observational PMI baselines by 34.8\% and 47.1\%, respectively. On VLMBias, the prefix--visual imbalance score achieves 0.767 AUROC and 0.873 AUPRC for distinguishing prior-driven from visually grounded generations. These results show that causal-drive trajectories provide complementary source-level diagnostics for multimodal generation.
Matteo He, William F. Shen, Xinchi Qiu +1cs.CL cs.AI cs.LG
A language model's prediction of its next token develops across layers, and lens methods track this process by decoding intermediate hidden states into tokens. But a lens reading reflects both the hidden state and the readout (the unembedding matrix) used to decode it. Many lenses are fit on a corpus, and we show that two lenses differing only in their fitting corpus can report different tokens for the same hidden states. We call this dependence corpus conditionality. To examine readout structure independently of the fitting corpus, we introduce Sparse Readout Prism (SRP), which decomposes the readout using only its weights and expresses any token logit or logit difference as a sum of contributions from sparse readout features. This reveals readout features as a new unit of analysis for lens readings, exposing structure that token identities can obscure and enabling comparisons across tokens, contexts, layers, and lenses. Replacing the original readout with SRP's sparse approximation reconstructs 8.9-17.3 percentage points more of the tested logit differences than the strongest of six baselines built on geometric relations among readout rows. Ablating features shifts logit differences in proportion to their SRP contributions. Although token readings vary with the fitting corpus, the dominant readout feature remains stable. Because SRP uses no corpus in its construction, it provides a control independent of the fitting corpus for lens analyses.
Recent work identifies a mid-depth band of verbalisable, causally potent representations in a standard feedforward transformer --- a functional analogue of a global workspace. Whether the same workspace functionality emerges when depth is implemented through recurrence rather than a stack of distinct layers remains unknown. Looped and depth-recurrent transformers provide a direct test of this question because they reuse the same weights across depth. We extend the Jacobian lens to iterated architectures using a virtual-unrolling adapter. We apply the full workspace suite --- lens fitting, readout, and eleven causal experiment families --- to Ouro-2.6B (48 layers looped 4 times, deeply supervised) and Huginn-0125 (a 4-layer core recurred 16 times, trained for latent reasoning), using Qwen3.6-27B (64 untied layers) as the standard baseline. We find that a workspace forms in the iterated part of each architecture, but that recurrence changes how it can be accessed. Ouro reconstructs workspace content in every loop, and linear transport cannot carry that content across loop boundaries; writes and ablations must therefore span every remaining loop. Huginn carries content forward across all sixteen recurrences, while reads, writes, and ablations act only within a sliding window of roughly two recurrences. Whether newly injected content can be verbalised tracks explicit per-iteration supervision; whether existing content can be steered does not.
Osvaldo M Velarde, Lucas C Parra, Alireza Hashemi +1cs.LG
Artificial neural networks are often regarded as powerful yet opaque black boxes. Here, we demonstrate that learning in deep neural networks generates local symmetries known in graph theory as fibrations and coverings. We prove that covering symmetries are stable attractors of stochastic gradient descent. Consistent with this theory, we report the emergence of covering symmetries across major network architectures, including multilayer, convolutional, recurrent, and transformer networks. Exploiting these symmetries enables drastic model compression - reducing networks to 17% of their original size without sacrificing performance. Furthermore, controlled breaking of covering symmetry overcomes the loss of plasticity, achieving state-of-the-art performance in continual learning. The theoretical results provide a new foundation for AI systems based on symmetries that convert black boxes into interpretable colored graphs and enable more efficient inference and lifelong learning.
Benign fine-tuning severely weakens the safety alignment of large language models (LLMs), so we study why refusal behavior is so fragile. While prior work often attributes this failure to gradient conflict, we propose a fundamentally different Fisher-geometric explanation: safety Fisher is low-rank, and alignment makes the safety geometry flatter while preserving an output-routing pathway. After 100 benign fine-tuning examples, this pathway is selectively re-sharpened in output-side MLP modules, explaining the asymmetric fragility: safety can collapse to high attack success rates, while general utility degrades mildly. The routing view also explains why few safety examples can restore refusal behavior, indicating that internal safety-relevant representations are preserved. Finally, we show that LoRA and ASAM mitigate early collapse by suppressing output-side sharpness, but their protection weakens at larger fine-tuning scales. Overall, safety failure is best understood as a disruption of a low-rank output-routing mechanism
Low-rank adaptation fixes the rank of the update, but it does not identify which parts of a trained write actually carry behavior. We study that question directly and show that behaviorally effective LoRA writes are sparse, structured, and far more concentrated than the raw low-rank parameterization suggests. We use Learned-Basis LoRA, a learned-basis continuation recipe, to expose that structure. The recipe warms up an unconstrained adapter, converts its learned write columns into a module-wise orthonormal basis, freezes that basis, and continues training inside the constrained parameterization. Across 14 exact switches from unconstrained to constrained form, held-out accuracy is unchanged at the conversion step and reconstructed write matrices differ by at most 0.25% relative Frobenius error. Same-state continuation then shows that the same trained checkpoint develops differently under different write subspaces, establishing write geometry as a causal state variable. A no-retraining projection test shows that useful write signal stays inside the learned write space and largely disappears from random or frozen-activation PCA controls. The concentration pattern is strong at both local and global scales. Across GSM8K, MathQA, and AQuA, per-module top-k continuation reaches its optimum at k in {2, 4} in all twelve seed-level cases we test. A stricter global ranking test shows that learned top-16 and top-32 subsets outperform matched random subsets, especially on GSM8K/Qwen and MathQA/Qwen. Single-direction ablations further reveal a sparse set of late q_proj, o_proj, and down_proj components with outsized behavioral impact.
Emotion is expressed in text along a wide spectrum, from surface lexical cues to inferences entangled with content. Most layer-wise analyses of emotion in LLMs use a single corpus, leaving open whether the depth at which emotion becomes accessible is a property of the model or also of the text source. We investigate this across three datasets spanning different degrees of explicitness and contextualization in emotion expression (Twitter posts, Reddit comments, and autobiographical narratives) and eight 1B--9B open-weight LLMs from the Llama, Qwen, and Granite families. We combine layer-wise probing with offline feature scaling and online forward interventions, transfer analyses, and an early-exit classifier. We find that (i) the best probing layer shifts systematically across corpora, from input-adjacent layers to over half model depth, and this ordering persists after matching label-by-length-bin distributions; (ii) across the evaluated settings, forward-pass interventions on probe-selected bands reduce test accuracy by 5--6 points more than same-width random bands ($q < 0.01$); (iii) selected bands transfer across datasets and emotion categories, suggesting partially shared affective information rather than strictly per-emotion substrates; and (iv) probe-selected early-exit representations outperform full-depth exits by $6.9$ percentage points on average.
Large language models exhibit a modular internal organization that mirrors well-studied functional networks of the human brain, but how this organization forms during training is unknown: prior work has characterized finished models, not the formation process. We track formation step by step: we train a Pythia-410M model from scratch (two trajectories, bf16 and fp32) and run attribution patching at every step, alongside probes for gradient norms, effective updates, weight norms, and first-order loss decomposition across 14 tasks in four cognitive domains. Three findings. First, the modular map is pre-carved: before any learning, the dominant task pair already overlaps at ~3.6x the attribution substrate (a task-independent baseline), and its layer-0 concentration is an architecture-level constant on this model family. Second, the partition locks in through two sharp jumps whose amplitudes do not track the learning-rate schedule (the second reaching 20.4 sigma quiet-window / 6.2 sigma global), accompanied by gradient-level relative deprivation--winners receive 2.25->2.73x the loser's gradient supply, 9.5-11.5 standard deviations below a random control--that does not propagate to updates or weights. Third, deviation from the substrate appears only in the domain being learned, consistent with the hypothesis that modularity tracks learning. We close by separating the feature-level account we can defend from the mechanistic questions we cannot, and we pre-register the scale-threshold hypothesis behind our ongoing 2.8B experiments.
Large language models often answer the same multiple-choice question inconsistently when it is posed under support-oriented and elimination-oriented framings. We investigate whether these discrepancies arise from different internal representations induced by the two framings. We introduce a dual-framing protocol with minimally varied prompts that use either support- or elimination-oriented framing while keeping the evaluation target fixed. To probe the internal computation, we append an untrained special token, [STATE], and treat its residual-stream activation as an intervention interface. Across both models, the two framings induce separable [STATE] activations concentrated in intermediate layers. Swapping these activations between paired prompts systematically changes predictions and improves cross-framing agreement, providing intervention-based evidence that the activations are behaviorally relevant. Beyond instance-level substitution, mean-difference steering directions derived from the dual-framing contrast exhibit more bounded layer-wise responses than matched contrastive activation addition directions under the evaluated protocol.
Across the full Pythia suite (160M-12B, eight checkpoints, four task families), a linear probe can read a target variable from the residual stream as early as step 1,000 at every scale -- yet steering along that same reading direction remains null-equivalent in 43 of 48 model-checkpoint cells. Internal readability systematically outruns causal efficacy, and the lag does not shrink with scale. We call this structure lagged coupling and decompose it into three dissociable tracks: (i) internal readability, saturated (AUROC >= 0.990) from the first checkpoint everywhere; (ii) behavioral readability, which develops gradually and progressively later at larger scales (12B reaches 0.909 only at the final checkpoint); (iii) causal efficacy, almost always null-equivalent, occasionally counterproductive early, with one isolated positive pulse (12B, step 8,000, z = +2.49) our grid cannot resolve. The ordering is dominantly read-before-write (11/11 units, no inversion). Representation headroom along the probe direction grows up to 57x with training and scale while causal write-in stays below 0.11% of headroom -- the variable is increasingly written into the representation and increasingly ignored by the readout. Under a fully pre-registered protocol, both single-onset hypotheses resolve INDETERMINATE (scale slope +0.24, 95% CI [-0.60, +0.87]; time vote 3:3) -- a disciplined negative explained by the three-track decomposition. A pre-registered OLMo-2 replication preserves the direction at attenuated magnitude. Our results caution against inferring steerability from probe accuracy and establish a developmental bottleneck: representation formation reliably outpaces causal readout consolidation.
Whether attention weights faithfully reflect model reasoning has been actively debated in NLP, yet this question remains largely unexplored for the visual modality in Vision-Language Models (VLMs). We address this gap through causal perturbation analysis on current VLMs, evaluating both the comprehensiveness and sufficiency gap of attention-ranked visual tokens. Our analysis reveals that visual attention faithfulness is heterogeneous, manifesting in three distinct processing modes: Faithful-Sufficient, where top-$k$ attention tokens are both necessary and sufficient for prediction; Faithful-Distributed, where they are necessary but broader visual context remains required; and Non-Focal, where no localized attention region is individually necessary while visual information remains an essential trigger for prediction. Furthermore, human-annotated ground-truth regions satisfy comprehensiveness in only $\sim 60$% of cases compared with model attention rankings, revealing systematic divergence between model visual reliance and human intuition. We demonstrate these patterns across both general VQA on VQAv2 and document tasks on VRDU and ChartQA, showing that visual attention faithfulness varies systematically with processing demands and model architectures rather than being uniformly faithful or unfaithful.
Neural networks are increasingly employed to identify both well-defined and ambiguous concepts, yet output-level metrics reveal little about how those concepts are represented internally. Our study asks if these networks exhibit \textit{conceptual separation}: if examples of the same concept form coherent representations, and whether related concepts lie closer together in the representation space. We examine this conceptual organisation in Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) through geometric and distributional analysis of their internal activations. In CNNs, familiar ImageNet concepts form coherent and semantically ordered representations, while this coherence weakens for unseen concepts and suffers within-class domain shift. In LLMs, clearly distinct domains remain well separated, related subdomains move closer together, and the distinction between ambiguous topics collapses at both the mean and covariance level. These results suggest that conceptual separation can reveal structure that output accuracy alone cannot, and may serve as a useful diagnostic of how robustly a model represents the concepts it is asked to identify. Code and data available on \href{https://github.com/JaeeRoshniCapstoneProject/Are-You-Thinking-What-I-m-Thinking-Examining-Conceptual-Separation-in-Neural-Architectures}{GitHub}.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly trained to decline queries that fall outside their knowledge (knowledge-based refusal, KR) or violate safety policies (safety-based refusal, SR). Although KR and SR result in superficially similar responses, they have largely been studied in isolation, leaving open whether they share an underlying mechanism. We address this gap with a systematic study on a new dataset of 213 contrastive quadruples that jointly probe both refusal types. We find that KR and SR are governed by overlapping yet distinguishable mechanisms. Both share a refusal direction, yet the overlap is asymmetric: SR signals transfer more strongly to KR than the reverse. Type-specific specialization emerges mainly in upper layers, with KR aligning with uncertainty- and knowledge-related representations and SR with safety- and policy-related ones. We thus characterize refusal as a commit-then-specify process: a shared initial mechanism commits to refusing, then type-specific features in later layers specify whether the grounds are epistemic or normative.
Benjamin Shih, John Winnicki, Arianna Caocs.LG cs.CL
When contextual information conflicts with the knowledge stored in model parameters, activation directions can be used to decode and steer which source the model follows. However, steering along a direction does not establish causality: whether the unedited model would naturally use that direction or whether the direction is reusable across tasks. We test these distinctions through counterfactual experiments in unambiguous settings. First, we estimate authority directions from agreement prompts, in which the context and parametric knowledge support the same answer. We then interchange naturally occurring coordinates along these directions between matched prompts that direct the model to prioritize either the supplied context or its parametric knowledge. Across Qwen, Llama, and OLMo models, this intervention reproduces 30-68% of the authority-induced shift in source choice, whereas matched controls reproduce almost none. To test cross-task reuse, we learn authority directions on two tasks separately and see that cross-task transferability closes only 9% of the authority gap while the local direction learned on the given task closes 57%. These results distinguish authority representation, causal use, and cross-task causal reuse, and suggest that authority computations may be task-dependent, rather than reusable across tasks.
A transformer carries each token's state from layer to layer, and the whole vocabulary carried together forms a cloud that moves with depth. We ask whether a trained network moves this cloud the way optimal transport would: at the cheapest cost, and along the map that pairs each token with its optimal destination. We measure both on Pythia-160m and Pythia-410m, with an exact assignment between consecutive layer clouds, a measured sampling floor, calibration on couplings known to be optimal, and a split of the cost into the common shift of the cloud and the token-specific moves. At the last layer, both models move their tokens where the optimal-transport map sends them, at the optimal cost for Pythia-410m and slightly above it for Pythia-160m. At the first layer they do not. In between, single layers can be judged on cost at only two of ten transitions, and blocks of several layers move the cloud at close to the optimal cost. The agreement at the last layer is much weaker at initialisation (0.64 against 0.86) and grows with training.