Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

A Language Model's Guide Through Latent Space

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.14433 v1 pith:DCTDCLZF submitted 2024-02-22 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords conceptguidanceworkconceptstruthfulnessappropriatenesscurrentdetection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Concept guidance has emerged as a cheap and simple way to control the behavior of language models by probing their hidden representations for concept vectors and using them to perturb activations at inference time. While the focus of previous work has largely been on truthfulness, in this paper we extend this framework to a richer set of concepts such as appropriateness, humor, creativity and quality, and explore to what degree current detection and guidance strategies work in these challenging settings. To facilitate evaluation, we develop a novel metric for concept guidance that takes into account both the success of concept elicitation as well as the potential degradation in fluency of the guided model. Our extensive experiments reveal that while some concepts such as truthfulness more easily allow for guidance with current techniques, novel concepts such as appropriateness or humor either remain difficult to elicit, need extensive tuning to work, or even experience confusion. Moreover, we find that probes with optimal detection accuracies do not necessarily make for the optimal guides, contradicting previous observations for truthfulness. Our work warrants a deeper investigation into the interplay between detectability, guidability, and the nature of the concept, and we hope that our rich experimental test-bed for guidance research inspires stronger follow-up approaches.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LLMs Encode Harmfulness and Refusal Separately

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    LLMs encode a separate internal harmfulness direction, distinct from the refusal direction, which is more robust to jailbreaks and adversarial finetuning.

  2. Can Aha Moments Be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought

    cs.LG 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs interleave true causal reasoning steps with decorative ones in CoT, with only ~2.3% of steps having high causal impact on AIME for Qwen-2.5, and a steering direction can force internal use of specific steps.

  3. From Emergence to Control: Probing and Modulating Self-Reflection in Language Models

    cs.LG 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Self-reflection in LLMs can be steered up or down by a single activation-space vector, improving accuracy when amplified and cutting output length when suppressed.

  4. Probing the Robustness of Large Language Models Safety to Latent Perturbations

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Randomized noise injected into hidden layers bypasses safety refusals in 12 open LLMs, and layer-wise adversarial training on the resulting benchmark reduces the attack's success.

Pith tools