Shared Emotion Geometry Across Small Language Models: A Cross-Architecture Study of Representation, Behavior, and Methodological Confounds
Organizations: Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology (DGIST) · ModuLabs
Abstract
We extract 21-emotion vector sets from twelve small language models (six architectures x base/instruct, 1B-8B parameters) under a unified comprehension-mode pipeline at fp16 precision, and compare the resulting geometries via representational similarity analysis on raw cosine RDMs. The five mature architectures (Qwen 2.5 1.5B, SmolLM2 1.7B, Llama 3.2 3B, Mistral 7B v0.3, Llama 3.1 8B) share nearly identical 21-emotion geometry, with pairwise RDM Spearman correlations of 0.74-0.92. This universality persists across diametrically opposed behavioral profiles: Qwen 2.5 and Llama 3.2 occupy opposite poles of MTI Compliance facets yet produce nearly identical emotion RDMs (rho = 0.81), so behavioral facet differences arise above the shared emotion representation. Gemma-3 1B base, the one immature case in our dataset, exhibits extreme residual-stream anisotropy (0.997) and is restructured by RLHF across all geometric descriptors, whereas the five already-mature families show within-family base x instruct RDM correlations of rho >= 0.92 (Mistral 7B v0.3 at rho = 0.985), suggesting RLHF restructures only representations that are not yet organized. Methodologically, we show that what prior work has read as a single comprehension-vs-generation method effect in fact decomposes into four distinct layers -- a coarse method-dependent dissociation, robust sub-parameter sensitivity within generation, a true precision (fp16 vs INT8) effect, and a conflated cross-experiment bias that distorts in opposite directions for different models -- so that a single rho between two prior emotion-vector studies is not a safe basis for interpretation without the layered decomposition.
Figures & tables
| Family | Size | Layers | d_model | Backend | Variants |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gemma-3 | 1B | 26 | 1152 | TransformerLens | base, instruct |
| Qwen 2.5 | 1.5B | 28 | 1536 | TransformerLens | base, instruct |
| SmolLM2 | 1.7B | 24 | 2048 | HF raw hooks | base, instruct |
| Llama 3.2 | 3B | 28 | 3072 | TransformerLens | base, instruct |
| Mistral v0.3 | 7B | 32 | 4096 | HF raw hooks (RunPod A40) | base, instruct |
| Llama 3.1 | 8B | 32 | 4096 | TransformerLens (RunPod A40) | base, instruct |
| Predictor | Outcome | Spearman | p (uncorrected) |
|---|---|---|---|
| d_model | anisotropy at best layer | 0.882 | 0.0001 |
| size (B) | anisotropy at best layer | 0.820 | 0.0011 |
| size (B) | RDM standard deviation | 0.891 | 0.0001 |
| size (B) | best layer % | 0.484 | 0.11 |
| Layer | Contrast | What it isolates |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | A vs C | Method (comprehension vs protocol-matched generation), precision held at fp16 |
| 2 | B vs C | Sub-parameter sensitivity within generation, method and precision held constant |
| 3 | C vs D | Precision (fp16 vs INT8), generation method and sub-parameters held identical |
| 4 | A vs D | The conflated cross-experiment statistic that mixes all three of the above (not an independent source of variance) |
| Layer | Contrast | Mistral 7B Instruct ( ) | Llama 3.1 8B Instruct ( ) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | A vs C (clean method) | 0.091 | 0.355 |
| 2 | B vs C (sub-parameter) | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| 3 | C vs D (clean precision) | 0.215 | 0.527 |
| 4 | A vs D (conflated) | 0.409 | 0.325 |
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| # | HuggingFace model_id | Family | Variant | Size (B) | Layers | d_model | Backend | Best Layer | Best Layer % | Anisotropy | RDM std |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qwen/Qwen2.5-1.5B | Qwen 2.5 | B | 1.5 | 28 | 1536 | TL | 15 | 53.6 | 0.830 | 0.127 |
| 2 | Qwen/Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct | Qwen 2.5 | I | 1.5 | 28 | 1536 | TL | 15 | 53.6 | 0.848 | 0.130 |
| 3 | HuggingFaceTB/SmolLM2-1.7B | SmolLM2 | B | 1.7 | 24 | 2048 | HF | 13 | 54.2 | 0.854 | 0.123 |
| 4 | HuggingFaceTB/SmolLM2-1.7B-Instruct | SmolLM2 | I | 1.7 | 24 | 2048 | HF | 11 | 45.8 | 0.808 | 0.118 |
| 5 | google/gemma-3-1b-pt | Gemma-3 | B | 1.0 | 26 | 1152 | TL | 9 | 34.6 | 0.997 | 0.333 |
| 6 | google/gemma-3-1b-it | Gemma-3 | I | 1.0 | 26 | 1152 | TL | 15 | 57.7 | 0.982 | 0.165 |
Representation Geometry in Language Models
Representation geometry in language models studies how embeddings and hidden states organize concepts, computation, and behavior.
See all 417 papers