87.1LGMar 22Code
Mechanisms of Introspective AwarenessUzay Macar, Li Yang, Atticus Wang et al.
Recent work shows that LLMs can sometimes detect when steering vectors are injected into their residual stream and identify the injected concept, a phenomenon cited as evidence of "introspective awareness." But what mechanisms underlie this capability, and do they reflect genuine introspective circuitry or more shallow heuristics? We investigate these questions in open-source models and establish three main findings. First, introspection is behaviorally robust: detection achieves moderate true positive rates with 0% false positives across diverse prompts. We also find this capability emerges specifically from post-training rather than pretraining. Second, introspection is not reducible to a single linear confound: anomaly detection relies on distributed MLP computation across multiple directions, implemented by evidence carrier and gate features. Third, models possess greater introspective capability than is elicited by default: ablating refusal directions improves detection by 53pp and a trained steering vector by 75pp. Overall, our results suggest that introspective awareness is behaviorally robust, grounded in nontrivial internal anomaly detection, and likely could be substantially improved in future models. Code: https://github.com/safety-research/introspection-mechanisms.
LGFeb 16
Automatically Finding Reward Model BiasesAtticus Wang, Iván Arcuschin, Arthur Conmy
Reward models are central to large language model (LLM) post-training. However, past work has shown that they can reward spurious or undesirable attributes such as length, format, hallucinations, and sycophancy. In this work, we introduce and study the research problem of automatically finding reward model biases in natural language. We offer a simple approach of using an LLM to iteratively propose and refine candidate biases. Our method can recover known biases and surface novel ones: for example, we found that Skywork-V2-8B, a leading open-weight reward model, often mistakenly favors responses with redundant spacing and responses with hallucinated content. In addition, we show evidence that evolutionary iteration outperforms flat best-of-N search, and we validate the recall of our pipeline using synthetically injected biases. We hope our work contributes to further research on improving RMs through automated interpretability methods.
CLJul 10, 2025
Simple Mechanistic Explanations for Out-Of-Context ReasoningAtticus Wang, Joshua Engels, Oliver Clive-Griffin et al.
Out-of-context reasoning (OOCR) is a phenomenon in which fine-tuned LLMs exhibit surprisingly deep out-of-distribution generalization. Rather than learning shallow heuristics, they implicitly internalize and act on the consequences of observations scattered throughout the fine-tuning data. In this work, we investigate this phenomenon mechanistically and find that many instances of OOCR in the literature have a simple explanation: the LoRA fine-tuning essentially adds a constant steering vector, steering the model towards a general concept. This improves performance on the fine-tuning task and in many other concept-related domains, causing the surprising generalization. Moreover, we can directly train steering vectors for these tasks from scratch, which also induces OOCR. We find that our results hold even for a task that seems like it must involve conditional behavior (model backdoors); it turns out that unconditionally adding a steering vector is sufficient. Overall, our work presents one explanation of what gets learned during fine-tuning for OOCR tasks, contributing to the key question of why LLMs can reason out of context, an advanced capability that is highly relevant to their safe and reliable deployment.
LGMay 30, 2025
Breakpoint: Scalable evaluation of system-level reasoning in LLM code agentsKaivalya Hariharan, Uzay Girit, Atticus Wang et al.
Benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) have predominantly assessed short-horizon, localized reasoning. Existing long-horizon suites (e.g. SWE-bench) rely on manually curated issues, so expanding or tuning difficulty demands expensive human effort and evaluations quickly saturate. However, many real-world tasks, such as software engineering or scientific research, require agents to rapidly comprehend and manipulate novel, complex structures dynamically; evaluating these capabilities requires the ability to construct large and varied sets of problems for agents to solve. We introduce Breakpoint, a benchmarking methodology that automatically generates code-repair tasks by adversarially corrupting functions within real-world software repositories. Breakpoint systematically controls task difficulty along two clear dimensions: local reasoning (characterized by code complexity metrics such as cyclomatic complexity) and system-level reasoning (characterized by call-graph centrality and the number of simultaneously corrupted interdependent functions). In experiments across more than 900 generated tasks we demonstrate that our methodology can scale to arbitrary difficulty, with state-of-the-art models' success rates ranging from 55% on the easiest tasks down to 0% on the hardest.