arXiv:2606. 01060v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Preference alignment has substantially improved the observable behavior of large language models, yet it remains unclear what alignment changes internally.
arXiv:2608.29610v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The current alignment tuning paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) prioritizes surface-level behaviors -- fluency, safety, and tonal consistency. W...
arXiv:2603.18908v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Independently trained language models often learn compatible late-stage representations, despite differences in training objectives, architectures,...
Warning: This paper studies stereotypes and biases, and contains potentially disturbing examples, used for illustration purposes only. Our findings should not be interpreted as an argument against alignment.
arXiv:2609.23065v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) can sound plausible yet be unfaithful to the model's underlying reasoning. Most prior work probes CoT faithfulness through inp...
arXiv:2609.32717v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) alignment is intended to ensure that models remain helpful and safe, but its stability under input distributional...
The paper investigates how alignment training, specifically reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), affects the internal partisan structure of a large language model. Using a mechanistic case study on Llama 3.1 8B, the authors find that alignment training does not erase the model’s partisan geometry but compresses its variance, producing consistently balanced, non‑partisan outputs. Sparse autoencoder analysis and feature‑level steering experiments reveal that policy‑encoding features become inactive in the aligned model, indicating a causal disconnect rather than structural removal of partisan knowledge.
arXiv:2608. 11027v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmark leaderboards summarize how well a language model performs, but not how its behavior relates to that of other models or changes across generations.
arXiv:2607. 21433v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Chain-of-thought reasoning models such as DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B exhibit a bimodal convergence pattern: generations either terminate within a token budget (converged) or exhaust it without reaching a conclusion (non-converged).
arXiv:2609.16454v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent work by Doshi and Hauser (2024), Bisbee et al. (2024), and Xie et al. (2026) raises concerns that outputs from large language models (LLMs) tend...
The paper reports a Size‑Fidelity Paradox in large‑language‑model (LLM) context compression: larger compressors can produce lower reconstruction error yet yield less faithful reconstructed contexts. Two key mechanisms drive this effect: knowledge overwriting, where larger models replace source facts with their own beliefs, and semantic drift, where they paraphrase or restructure content. Across 27 compressor setups, mid‑sized models often recover contexts more faithfully, and analysis of embedding geometry shows that larger models organize memory into broader semantic subspaces, leading to ambiguous representations that weaken recovery.
arXiv:2606. 11552v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks, but their autoregressive decoding process incurs substantial inference costs due to inherently sequential token generation.