arXiv:2607. 00089v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mechanistic interpretability has produced a rich inventory of component-level analyses that characterise what neural-network components encode and how they interact.
By Hussein Chouman, Wataru Sasaki, Tomokazu Matsui, Hirohiko Suwa, Keiichi Yasumoto
arXiv:2503. 06269v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Traditional white-box methods for creating adversarial perturbations against LLMs typically rely only on gradient computation from the targeted model, ignoring the internal mechanisms responsible for attack success or failure.
By Thomas Winninger, Boussad Addad, Katarzyna Kapusta
arXiv:2606. 32008v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mechanistic interpretability (MI) requires full access to model internals, yet the APIs for most widely deployed language models at best expose log-probabilities over output tokens.
By Philippe Chlenski, Zachariah Carmichael, Ayush Warikoo, Chia-Tse Shao, Yingxiao Ye, Aobo Yang, Vivek Miglani, Nehal Bandi
arXiv:2608. 07594v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interpretability is often treated as a tax on capability: language models are trained as opaque systems, then explained after the fact, with methods whose reliability is difficult to establish.
By Guide Labs Team, Andreas Madsen, Aya Abdelsalam Ismail, Giang Nguyen, Isaac Plant, Muawiz Chaudhary, Nathaniel Monson, Saqib Azim, Zhichen Guo, Julius Adebayo
arXiv:2605. 08934v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Mechanistic interpretability aims to explain neural model behaviour by reverse-engineering learned computational structure into human-understandable components.
By Ward Gauderis, Thomas Dooms, Steven T. Homer, Kola Ayonrinde, Geraint A. Wiggins
arXiv:2606. 29951v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Interpretable Mesomorphic Neural Networks (IMNs) offer a promising framework that combines the predictive power of deep neural networks with the interpretability of linear models.
By Hugo L. Hammer, Vajira Thambawita, Kristoffer Herland Hellton, P{\aa}l Halvorsen
arXiv:2609.00051v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Despite extensive alignment efforts, Large Language Models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to generating unsafe content under adversarial prompting, yet the...
By Kuan-Lin Chu, Chung-En Sun, Tsui-Wei Weng
The paper identifies a new failure mode in neurosymbolic systems called Verdict‑Preserving‑Unfaithfulness (VPU), where incorrect formal encodings can still pass solver checks. It introduces Generative Verification (GenV), a method that uses a language model to produce a continuous reference‑equivalence score without relying on explicit localization. Experiments show GenV+HN achieves high AUROC, generalizes to unseen translators, and improves downstream agent performance by 11.3 points.
By Vikash Singh, Debargha Ganguly, Aman Goel, Ali Torkamani, Xiaoxue Han, Joseph Lilien, Ferhat Erata, Vipin Chaudhary
arXiv:2608.24482v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Mechanistic Localization bridges mechanistic interpretability and post-training optimization by isolating critical parameters via interpretative appr...
By Hang Chen, Jiaying Zhu, Wenya Wang
The paper argues that as Large Language Models transition from chatbots to agentic systems, the current post-hoc interpretability paradigm is insufficient for safe deployment because it cannot audit or intervene before an output is produced. It proposes a shift to generative interpretability, where a model’s inference process inherently exposes semantically meaningful checkpoints that are human-understandable and can be causally intervened upon. The authors illustrate the advantages of this approach and introduce Neuro‑Symbolic Models as a concrete implementation.
By Xiaocong Yang
arXiv:2607. 01033v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model organisms (MOs) - language models trained to exhibit undesired or unnatural behaviours - are frequently used as testbeds for evaluating white-box interpretability techniques.
By Andrzej Szablewski, Gabriel Konar-Steenberg, Raffaello Fornasiere, Nikita Menon, Stefan Heimersheim
The paper introduces a formal auditing framework to evaluate the robustness and fidelity of post‑hoc explainers such as SHAP and LIME. It defines a Trust Score that combines how stable an explanation is under small input perturbations with how well the highlighted features actually influence the model’s prediction. Experiments on a Madagascar malnutrition dataset show that even highly accurate models can produce unreliable explanations, and that fidelity scores degrade when models overfit.
By Rosa Elysabeth Ralinirina, Jean Christian Ralaivao, Niaiko Micha\"el Ralaivao, Alain Josu\'e Ratovondrahona, Thomas Mahatody