Subhash Kantamneni

Wes Gurnee, Nicholas Sofroniew, Adam Pearce et al.

Out of everything the human brain processes, only a small fraction is consciously accessible, in the sense of being available for verbal report, deliberate control, and flexible reasoning. In this paper, we present evidence that an analogous functional distinction has emerged in large language models. Using a new interpretability technique, the Jacobian lens, we identify the representations a model is poised to verbalize at any point in its processing. These representations, which we collectively call the J-space, exhibit the functional properties characteristic of a global workspace: their contents can be reported, deliberately summoned and held, used to carry the intermediate steps of silent reasoning, and passed as arguments to arbitrary downstream computations, while automatic processing such as text parsing and routine inference proceeds without them. The J-space also has structural signatures that global workspace theory associates with conscious access: it carries coherent content only in an intermediate band of layers, holds on the order of tens of concepts at a time, and is broadcast by the model's weights more widely than other representations. These properties make it a practical window into a model's unspoken thinking. In alignment audits, it reveals strategic deliberation, evaluation awareness, and trained-in misaligned dispositions that never appear in the model's outputs. We find that post-training installs the Assistant's point of view in the workspace, and we introduce counterfactual reflection training, which improves behavior by training only what a model would say if interrupted and asked to reflect. These results indicate that language models maintain a small, privileged set of representations bearing some of the functional hallmarks of conscious access, and that decoding these representations sheds light on ongoing cognitive processes.

Subhash Kantamneni, Joshua Engels, Senthooran Rajamanoharan et al.

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are a popular method for interpreting concepts represented in large language model (LLM) activations. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the validity of their interpretations due to the lack of a ground truth for the concepts used by an LLM, and a growing number of works have presented problems with current SAEs. One alternative source of evidence would be demonstrating that SAEs improve performance on downstream tasks beyond existing baselines. We test this by applying SAEs to the real-world task of LLM activation probing in four regimes: data scarcity, class imbalance, label noise, and covariate shift. Due to the difficulty of detecting concepts in these challenging settings, we hypothesize that SAEs' basis of interpretable, concept-level latents should provide a useful inductive bias. However, although SAEs occasionally perform better than baselines on individual datasets, we are unable to design ensemble methods combining SAEs with baselines that consistently outperform ensemble methods solely using baselines. Additionally, although SAEs initially appear promising for identifying spurious correlations, detecting poor dataset quality, and training multi-token probes, we are able to achieve similar results with simple non-SAE baselines as well. Though we cannot discount SAEs' utility on other tasks, our findings highlight the shortcomings of current SAEs and the need to rigorously evaluate interpretability methods on downstream tasks with strong baselines.

Subhash Kantamneni, Max Tegmark

Mathematical reasoning is an increasingly important indicator of large language model (LLM) capabilities, yet we lack understanding of how LLMs process even simple mathematical tasks. To address this, we reverse engineer how three mid-sized LLMs compute addition. We first discover that numbers are represented in these LLMs as a generalized helix, which is strongly causally implicated for the tasks of addition and subtraction, and is also causally relevant for integer division, multiplication, and modular arithmetic. We then propose that LLMs compute addition by manipulating this generalized helix using the "Clock" algorithm: to solve $a+b$, the helices for $a$ and $b$ are manipulated to produce the $a+b$ answer helix which is then read out to model logits. We model influential MLP outputs, attention head outputs, and even individual neuron preactivations with these helices and verify our understanding with causal interventions. By demonstrating that LLMs represent numbers on a helix and manipulate this helix to perform addition, we present the first representation-level explanation of an LLM's mathematical capability.

Yoshua Bengio, Tegan Maharaj, Luke Ong et al. · cmu, mila

Rapidly improving AI capabilities and autonomy hold significant promise of transformation, but are also driving vigorous debate on how to ensure that AI is safe, i.e., trustworthy, reliable, and secure. Building a trusted ecosystem is therefore essential -- it helps people embrace AI with confidence and gives maximal space for innovation while avoiding backlash. The "2025 Singapore Conference on AI (SCAI): International Scientific Exchange on AI Safety" aimed to support research in this space by bringing together AI scientists across geographies to identify and synthesise research priorities in AI safety. This resulting report builds on the International AI Safety Report chaired by Yoshua Bengio and backed by 33 governments. By adopting a defence-in-depth model, this report organises AI safety research domains into three types: challenges with creating trustworthy AI systems (Development), challenges with evaluating their risks (Assessment), and challenges with monitoring and intervening after deployment (Control).

Subhash Kantamneni, Ziming Liu, Max Tegmark

Integrable partial differential equation (PDE) systems are of great interest in natural science, but are exceedingly rare and difficult to discover. To solve this, we introduce OptPDE, a first-of-its-kind machine learning approach that Optimizes PDEs' coefficients to maximize their number of conserved quantities, $n_{\rm CQ}$, and thus discover new integrable systems. We discover four families of integrable PDEs, one of which was previously known, and three of which have at least one conserved quantity but are new to the literature to the best of our knowledge. We investigate more deeply the properties of one of these novel PDE families, $u_t = (u_x+a^2u_{xxx})^3$. Our paper offers a promising schema of AI-human collaboration for integrable system discovery: machine learning generates interpretable hypotheses for possible integrable systems, which human scientists can verify and analyze, to truly close the discovery loop.

Joshua Engels, David D. Baek, Subhash Kantamneni et al.

Scalable oversight, the process by which weaker AI systems supervise stronger ones, has been proposed as a key strategy to control future superintelligent systems. However, it is still unclear how scalable oversight itself scales. To address this gap, we propose a framework that quantifies the probability of successful oversight as a function of the capabilities of the overseer and the system being overseen. Specifically, our framework models oversight as a game between capability-mismatched players; the players have oversight-specific Elo scores that are a piecewise-linear function of their general intelligence, with two plateaus corresponding to task incompetence and task saturation. We validate our framework with a modified version of the game Nim and then apply it to four oversight games: Mafia, Debate, Backdoor Code and Wargames. For each game, we find scaling laws that approximate how domain performance depends on general AI system capability. We then build on our findings in a theoretical study of Nested Scalable Oversight (NSO), a process in which trusted models oversee untrusted stronger models, which then become the trusted models in the next step. We identify conditions under which NSO succeeds and derive numerically (and in some cases analytically) the optimal number of oversight levels to maximize the probability of oversight success. We also apply our theory to our four oversight games, where we find that NSO success rates at a general Elo gap of 400 are 13.5% for Mafia, 51.7% for Debate, 10.0% for Backdoor Code, and 9.4% for Wargames; these rates decline further when overseeing stronger systems.

Subhash Kantamneni, Ziming Liu, Max Tegmark

How do transformers model physics? Do transformers model systems with interpretable analytical solutions, or do they create "alien physics" that are difficult for humans to decipher? We take a step in demystifying this larger puzzle by investigating the simple harmonic oscillator (SHO), $\ddot{x}+2γ\dot{x}+ω_0^2x=0$, one of the most fundamental systems in physics. Our goal is to identify the methods transformers use to model the SHO, and to do so we hypothesize and evaluate possible methods by analyzing the encoding of these methods' intermediates. We develop four criteria for the use of a method within the simple testbed of linear regression, where our method is $y = wx$ and our intermediate is $w$: (1) Can the intermediate be predicted from hidden states? (2) Is the intermediate's encoding quality correlated with model performance? (3) Can the majority of variance in hidden states be explained by the intermediate? (4) Can we intervene on hidden states to produce predictable outcomes? Armed with these two correlational (1,2), weak causal (3) and strong causal (4) criteria, we determine that transformers use known numerical methods to model trajectories of the simple harmonic oscillator, specifically the matrix exponential method. Our analysis framework can conveniently extend to high-dimensional linear systems and nonlinear systems, which we hope will help reveal the "world model" hidden in transformers.