The study compares an English-only and a bilingual decoder-only model, each 310 M parameters, trained on eight diverse languages while controlling for English exposure, compute, and document overlap. After aligning on shared English vocabulary, the authors find that token embeddings appear similar, but the deeper hidden states used for prediction diverge across models. This hidden‑state mismatch grows through middle transformer layers and persists despite controls, indicating that contextual processing differs between the models.
"whyItMatters":"The findings show that embedding alignment can conceal significant internal representation differences, which is crucial for any downstream work that assumes aligned multilingual models are interchangeable."
By Anjishnu Mukherjee, Ziwei Zhu, Antonios Anastasopoulos
The study investigates whether monolingual language models, trained without joint multilingual objectives, develop cross-lingual alignment. By evaluating models such as Goldfish and independently built monolingual systems, the authors find that alignable representational geometry emerges across layers, strengthening with larger data, larger models, or closer linguistic proximity. A single Procrustes rotation on parallel sentences can map hidden states between models, and applying this rotation to a German model’s residuals swaps factual predictions to those of the donor English model, demonstrating functional transfer.
By Ej Zhou, Suchir Salhan, Catherine Arnett, Anna Korhonen
The paper extends mechanistic interpretability of large language models by modeling concepts as low‑dimensional non‑linear manifolds rather than linear subspaces. It introduces a concept‑based alignment (CBA) score to compare these manifolds across layers and models, revealing block structures in intermediate layers, a shift from syntax‑dominated to mixed syntactic‑semantic concepts, and training‑dependent multilingual sharing. The study also shows that alignment patterns differ across model families and training stages, with adjacent stages aligning more closely than distant ones.
By Tido Specht, Elias Benedict Krey, Nils Neukirch, Nils Strodthoff
arXiv:2604. 03532v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) show strong multilingual capabilities, yet reliably controlling the language of their outputs remains difficult.
By Sing Hieng Wong, Hassan Sajjad, A. B. Siddique
The paper investigates why large language models sometimes hallucinate when asked about facts in a language different from the one in which the facts were learned. By training small Transformer models on synthetic multilingual datasets, the authors show that the degree of correlation between facts and their learning language (informativeness) and the ease of language identification (extractability) determine whether models develop unified or separate representations across languages. Unified representations enable cross‑lingual fact transfer, while separate representations do not. The study proposes a unifying perspective on cross‑lingual transfer and suggests training methods to promote representational unification.
By Carter Blum, Katja Filippova, Ann Yuan, Asma Ghandeharioun, Julian Zimmert, Fred Zhang, Jessica Hoffmann, Tal Linzen, Martin Wattenberg, Lucas Dixon, Mor Geva
The paper investigates weight‑space merging of independently fine‑tuned multilingual machine translation models. Experiments show that merging is more successful when models share a target language, yet it still cannot match the peak performance of language‑specific checkpoints. When target languages differ, performance drops sharply, and analysis reveals that overlapping neuron activation and incompatible upper‑layer geometries cause these failures.
By Baban Gain, Trilok Nath Singh, Asif Ekbal
arXiv:2506. 20040v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Interpreting language models remains challenging due to the existence of residual stream, which linearly mixes and duplicates features across adjacent layers, causing single-layer analyses to miss this cross-layer structure.
By Ankur Garg, Xuemin Yu, Hassan Sajjad, Samira Ebrahimi Kahou
arXiv:2510. 05678v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While large language models (LLMs) have achieved notable progress in multilingual settings, their performance remains uneven across languages as LLMs often rely on English-centric latent representations.
By Haneul Yoo, Jiho Jin, Kyunghyun Cho, Alice Oh
SharedSAE demonstrates that a single sparse autoencoder can replace multiple model‑specific SAEs by using a shared dictionary with model‑specific encoder‑decoder pairs. It preserves activation magnitudes, normalizes only selection scores, and supports single‑model inference via model dropout. Trained on four 1B‑scale language models, SharedSAE retains 96.6% of the mean explained variance of dedicated SAEs, shows higher cross‑model latent correlations, and allows efficient adaptation of new models to the shared latent space.
By Daniil Ognev, C\'elian Vasson, Lijie Hu, Kentaro Inui, Benjamin Heinzerling
arXiv:2608. 05164v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Independently trained large language models may develop shared internal representations of semantic concepts despite architectural differences -- but whether this geometric similarity has functional consequences for cross-model behavioural control remains untested.
By Ayushi Agarwal
The paper investigates whether different latent language probes—GMM-based representation probes and decoding-based probes—measure the same phenomenon in multilingual language models. Across various model families, training regimes, domains, tasks, checkpoints, and up to 27 languages, the authors find systematic disagreement: representation probes indicate earlier cross‑lingual mixing, while decoding probes reveal sharper, English‑biased language signals. These differences correlate with model multilinguality and training progression but remain relatively stable across domains, suggesting that current probes capture distinct aspects of multilingual processing rather than a single internal lingua franca.
By Deniz Bayazit, Badr AlKhamissi, Antoine Bosselut
arXiv:2603.18908v5 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Independently trained language models often learn compatible late-stage representations, despite differences in training objectives, architectures,...
By Matt Gorbett, Suman Jana