Pau Rodríguez

Valentino Maiorca, Eleonora Gualdoni, Xavier Suau et al.

As foundation models grow in capability, the ability to efficiently and reliably control their behavior becomes critical. Fine-tuning these models can be costly, and while prompting can be practical for controllability, it remains fragile due to models' high sensitivity to exact prompt wording and structure. This brittleness has driven interest in activation steering techniques that offer more stable and predictable control over model behavior. However, existing activation steering methods require per-concept optimization, which makes them ill-suited to deployment scenarios where the concept set is large, evolving, or only specified at request time: each new concept incurs at least minutes of optimization on the target model. We propose HyperTransport, a hypernetwork framework that amortizes this cost by mapping embeddings from a pretrained encoder (CLIP in our instantiation) directly to intervention parameters, trained end-to-end using an optimal transport loss. Once trained, HyperTransport produces each new intervention in a single hypernetwork forward pass, 3600-7000x faster than per-concept fitting. On concepts unseen during training, it matches the strongest per-concept baselines at inducing the target concept. By decoupling concept representation from intervention prediction, HyperTransport combines three capabilities that no existing approach offers as a set: amortized steering for open-ended concept sets, continuous interpretable strength control, and cross-modal conditioning where reference images can directly steer text-based generation. We validate HyperTransport on DMD2 and Nitro-1-PixArt across 167 held-out test concepts via CLIP-based metrics, a VLM-as-a-judge evaluation, and a user study. In pairwise comparisons, both human and VLM judges prefer HyperTransport over prompting ~2x as often.

Iuri Macocco, Pau Rodríguez, Arno Blaas et al.

Controlling the output of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a central challenge for their reliable deployment, yet a clear understanding of the involved trade-offs remains elusive. Current approaches to conditioning are often evaluated with a narrow focus on their effectiveness at injecting or removing a target concept, neglecting generation quality. We systematically investigate a range of conditioning methods in both injection and removal scenarios. We find that efficient steering methods frequently achieve conditioning at a steep cost to fluency. Furthermore, we identify a critical yet previously overlooked interaction with the training paradigm: activation steering methods are far less effective on instruction-tuned models than on their base counterparts. Simple prompting and full-fledged supervised fine-tuning, on the other hand, are viable options for concept injection, but are not as good at concept removal. Finally, cheaply computed textual metrics highly correlate to costly LLM-as-judge scores, and provide insights on the behavior of conditioning methods.