arXiv:2606. 09899v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A central goal of mechanistic interpretability is to identify which internal components causally drive a language model's behavior.
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 AI.
arXiv:2608. 03842v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When a language model fails on surface-perturbed input (typos, OCR noise, homophones), "which layer is responsible" has three natural operationalizations: where representations diverge most (sensitivity), where restoring clean activations recovers the prediction (causality), and where a small adapter can repair the damage (compensatory capacity) - and we show these three layer maps dissociate.
arXiv:2609.35890v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse-autoencoder decomposability and concentrated feature attribution are increasingly treated as evidence that a model's computation is easier to re...
The paper introduces FTB Graph, a method for mapping the causal circuitry that determines the first-token language identity in multilingual language models. Using Edge Attribution Patching and exact activation patching across six architectures (GPT‑2, BLOOM‑560M, Pythia‑1B/2.8B, Qwen2.5‑1.5B Base/Instruct), the authors extract directed acyclic graphs that reveal deep or mid‑to‑deep broadcasting hubs, with notable differences among models. The study finds that first‑token routing is largely established during pretraining and largely preserved by instruction tuning, while linear gradient approximations can diverge from causal interventions, underscoring the need for exact‑patching verification.
The paper investigates mechanistic interpretability, focusing on how automated circuit discovery is evaluated. It shows that the commonly used faithfulness objective can favor circuits that reproduce a model’s behavior poorly, creating an objective-level recovery gap. Experiments on four human-reference tasks and InterpBench reveal that many discovery methods misrank candidate circuits, and that restoring excluded signals can correct most of these misrankings without altering the circuits’ behavior.
The paper demonstrates that greedy decoding from large language models is not precision‑invariant: the same model, prompt, and decoding algorithm can produce different outputs when run in BF16 versus FP16 on identical hardware. Across six models (1.1B–7B parameters, four families, and 12B) and three benchmarks, 49–100 % of prompts diverge, with a single token flip often cascading into trajectory‑level divergence. The authors develop an empirical error‑propagation analysis that identifies the top‑two logit margin at the LM head as the key factor, and they propose a low‑overhead intervention—selective FP32 LM head recomputation—that improves exact agreement by 22–36 percentage points with less than 4 % latency overhead. "whyItMatters":"The findings reveal that precision choices can fundamentally alter model outputs, challenging the assumption of deterministic greedy decoding and highlighting the need for precision‑aware inference strategies."
The paper introduces OSOL, a method for mitigating higher‑order interference in multi‑domain reinforcement learning. OSOL selects a focus domain each iteration, uses token‑level footprints from the previous checkpoint to rank rebound risk, and applies an adaptively scaled correction to the GRPO update. Experiments on Qwen3‑30B‑A3B show a 5.7% improvement over the best baseline without higher‑order differentiation.