Skip to content

StateSwap: Probing Support-Elimination Hidden States in Multiple-Choice Questions

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 31 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

A dual-framing protocol with minimally varied prompts that use either support- or elimination-oriented framing while keeping the evaluation target fixed is introduced, providing intervention-based evidence that the activations are behaviorally relevant.

Abstract

Large language models often answer the same multiple-choice question inconsistently when it is posed under support-oriented and elimination-oriented framings. We investigate whether these discrepancies arise from different internal representations induced by the two framings. We introduce a dual-framing protocol with minimally varied prompts that use either support- or elimination-oriented framing while keeping the evaluation target fixed. To probe the internal computation, we append an untrained special token, [STATE], and treat its residual-stream activation as an intervention interface. Across both models, the two framings induce separable [STATE] activations concentrated in intermediate layers. Swapping these activations between paired prompts systematically changes predictions and improves cross-framing agreement, providing intervention-based evidence that the activations are behaviorally relevant. Beyond instance-level substitution, mean-difference steering directions derived from the dual-framing contrast exhibit more bounded layer-wise responses than matched contrastive activation addition directions under the evaluated protocol.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Unmask the State: When Does State Adaptation Matter for Masked Diffusion Language Models

Masked diffusion language models (MDMs) admit flexible generation orders, making the unmasking strategy an inference decision. Existing methods vary in how they prioritize positions, control parallelism, restrict selection regions, revise predictions, or plan future denoising, yet it remains unclear when these choices...

InJin Kong, Sung-hwan Choi, Yohan Jo · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

A mechanistic study of language model introspection

Across three model families, two small groups of attention heads are identified with distinct roles in introspective reporting supporting introspective detection and localization of large language models.

Jia-Hong Zou, Xiang-Kun Sun, Ling-Kai Kong et al. · 0 citations
#natural language process... Preprint Sep 2026

Language Models Act on Hidden Valence

It is demonstrated that valence-related activation patterns leave hidden traces that predictably govern later choices, even when all visible tokens are identical across conditions, and whether these traces are accompanied by any subjective experience relevant to model welfare remains unclear.

Cameron Berg, Caspar Kaiser · 1 citation · ⚡1
#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

How Do Language Models Choose Between Context and Memory?

The results suggest that authority computations may be task-dependent, rather than reusable across tasks, and suggest that authority computations may be task-dependent, rather than reusable across tasks.

Benjamin Shih, John Winnicki, Arianna Cao · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Reasoning Instructions Can Break Answer Decoding in Vision--Language Models

Chain-of-thought (CoT) instructions can distort multiple-choice VLM evaluation when a scorer appends a reasoning cue but reads answer-label logits before the model generates any rationale. We call this CoT-prefix scoring. On ScienceQA, Qwen2.5-VL-7B drops from 80.76% to 45.48%, and across five option-content permutatio...

Zeyan Li, Si-Yuan Qiu, Jian-Feng Xu · 0 citations

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.