Both capability and safety benchmarks rest upon the assumption that the behavior of language models undergoing a test is informative about their behavior in deployment. This assumption can fail, should models infer that they are being evaluated and condition their response on such context. This hypothesis, termed ``evaluation awareness'', has been observed in frontier and open-weight language models alike. We provide a systematic study of this phenomenon, by probing for it across six language models (from four families and three sizes) and three metrics. More precisely, we examine whether (i) being under evaluation is linearly represented within the models'activations space, (ii) it is verbalized in their output tokens (as scored by an LLM-as-judge), and (iii) steering causally affects their behavior. For the open-checkpoint Olmo models, we further test these measures at every training stage. In doing so, we report that evaluation awareness is linearly decodable from the residual streams of every model (best AUROC $\geq 0.7$). By contrast, these representations align only in part with verbalization: their correlations and mutual information are nonzero in some settings, yet vary substantially across models, layers, and readout choices. Nevertheless, steering along probe-derived directions can shift the verbalization scores. Finally, a comparison across the Olmo checkpoints reveals that evaluation awareness is already present within base models, becomes amplified throughout the stages of supervised fine-tuning, and remains stable thereafter---unlike the effects of steering, that grow more pronounced at every successive training stage. These results show the need for evaluations to account for the disjunction between what models represent internally, what they verbalize, and their steering.
Extracting quantum information from a quantum state is a fundamental task of quantum computation, often requiring the estimation of many non-commuting observables under a finite measurement budget. For both near-term and early fault-tolerant settings, the measurement protocol must balance statistical efficiency against implementation resources such as circuit depth, connectivity, and entangling-gate count. Many existing strategies focus on two extremes: hardware-friendly product measurements with high sampling cost, and fully commuting measurements with deep circuits. Here we recast resource-constrained measurement design as a generative learning problem. We introduce FlowMeas, which uses a generative flow network to directly sample finite ensembles of shallow Clifford measurement circuits subject to a prescribed shot budget and hardware constraints. At zero entangling depth, FlowMeas learns qubit-wise commuting measurement schedules and already matches or improves leading product-measurement methods on nearly all molecular benchmarks. Allowing one or two entangling gate layers yields further reductions in energy estimation error of up to $27\%$ relative to the strongest state-independent product-measurement baseline. The learned policy can also be reused across related Hamiltonians, substantially accelerating retraining along a molecular potential-energy surface. We further obtain results for molecular Hamiltonians with up to 20 qubits and apply the framework to a compactly encoded 54-qubit interacting fermionic model, extending the demonstrated scale beyond prior molecular benchmarks. These results establish generative learning as a flexible and unified framework for quantum measurement design under practical resource constraints.
Jun Dai, O. Nahman-Lévesque, Guillaume Rabusseau et al.· 0 citations