arXiv Machine Learning By Carlo Di Cicco

Code Correctness Is Linearly Decodable from LLM Hidden States Before Generation

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

arXiv:2606. 14530v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models encode rich information in their hidden states.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 31

Why Didn't It Check? Unsupported Final Claims and Their Repair in Two Tool-Equipped Language Models

The study investigates how language models equipped with tools can still produce unsupported final claims, even when a single tool call could resolve the uncertainty. It defines two metrics—occurrence (how often unsupported claims arise) and conditional repair (how often they are fixed when evidence is provided). Experiments on Qwen3-32B and Gemma 4 show that providing the missing evidence consistently repairs all unsupported claims in the Qwen3-32B setup, while the Gemma 4 model never produced unsupported claims under the tested conditions.

By Justin Bronder
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 25

Encoded but Not Decoded: Layer-Localized Evidence for a Three-Level Gap in LLM Syntax

The paper introduces a three-level evaluation framework—behavioral deployment, LM-head readout, and probe recoverability—to distinguish whether a language model fails a syntactic test by not encoding structure or by failing to use it. Using a trilingual control-dependency benchmark, the authors find that probe recoverability consistently exceeds LM-head readout, which in turn exceeds behavioral deployment across seven models and three languages, with the largest gap observed in Qwen3-0.6B Instruct. Layer-localized activation patching shows that instruction tuning shifts the decoded layer later, suggesting decoding favors surface shortcuts and that behavioral evaluation understates what models encode while probing alone overstates what they deploy.

By Zhenyan Lu, He Wang, Xiaohui Huang
arXiv AI
Jun 6

Willing but Unable: Separating Refusal from Capability in Code LLMs via Abliteration

arXiv:2606. 05396v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Producing a labeled vulnerable code at scale is a recurring obstacle for learning-based vulnerability detection: mined corpora carry substantial label noise, and existing LLM-based augmentation propagates these inaccuracies because it transforms vulnerable seeds rather than synthesising vulnerabilities from a specification.

By Cristina Carleo, Pietro Liguori, Naghmeh Ivaki, Domenico Cotroneo