REVIEW 2 cited by
Hypothesis Testing the Circuit Hypothesis in LLMs
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate surprising capabilities, but we do not understand how they are implemented. One hypothesis suggests that these capabilities are primarily executed by small subnetworks within the LLM, known as circuits. But how can we evaluate this hypothesis? In this paper, we formalize a set of criteria that a circuit is hypothesized to meet and develop a suite of hypothesis tests to evaluate how well circuits satisfy them. The criteria focus on the extent to which the LLM's behavior is preserved, the degree of localization of this behavior, and whether the circuit is minimal. We apply these tests to six circuits described in the research literature. We find that synthetic circuits -- circuits that are hard-coded in the model -- align with the idealized properties. Circuits discovered in Transformer models satisfy the criteria to varying degrees. To facilitate future empirical studies of circuits, we created the \textit{circuitry} package, a wrapper around the \textit{TransformerLens} library, which abstracts away lower-level manipulations of hooks and activations. The software is available at \url{https://github.com/blei-lab/circuitry}.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Mechanistic Interpretability as Statistical Estimation: A Variance Analysis
Small changes in data or settings used to find a circuit in a language model often produce very different circuits: under bootstrap resampling, average pairwise overlap of EAP-IG circuits across tasks and models is on...
-
Can LLMs Lie? Investigation beyond Hallucination
The paper localizes LLM lying to sparse attention heads and chat-template 'dummy tokens', and shows steering vectors can modulate deception, but the evidence is weakened by selection and small samples.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.