cs.CLApr 21, 2026

Cell-Based Representation of Relational Binding in Language Models

Authors: Qin DaiBenjamin HeinzerlingKentaro Inui

Organizations: 1Tohoku University · 2RIKEN AIP · 3MBZUAI

Abstract

Understanding a discourse requires tracking entities and the relations that hold between them. While Large Language Models (LLMs) perform well on relational reasoning, the mechanism by which they bind entities, relations, and attributes remains unclear. We study discourse-level relational binding and show that LLMs encode it via a Cell-based Binding Representation (CBR): a low-dimensional linear subspace in which each ``cell'' corresponds to an entity--relation index pair, and bound attributes are retrieved from the corresponding cell during inference. Using controlled multi-sentence data annotated with entity and relation indices, we identify the CBR subspace by decoding these indices from attribute-token activations with Partial Least Squares regression. Across domains and two model families, the indices are linearly decodable and form a grid-like geometry in the projected space. We further find that context-specific CBR representations are related by translation vectors in activation space, enabling cross-context transfer. Finally, activation patching shows that manipulating this subspace systematically changes relational predictions and that perturbing it disrupts performance, providing causal evidence that LLMs rely on CBR for relational binding.

Explore similar work

Date pendingcs.CL

A retrieval conditioned rebinding circuit for dynamic entity tracking in large language models

To interpret context correctly and retrieve relevant information, large language models must bind entities to their attributes and update these bindings as state changes. We analyze how LLMs implement this binding process in a dynamic state tracking. Using causal interventions, we identify a retrieval conditioned rebinding mechanism, a compact attention head circuit that propagated binding information and when the entity is queried, uses the updated binding to retrieve the corresponding attribute. Across Gemma and Llama models, this circuit supports rebinding behavior, but the representational signature of the mechanism differs across model families. In Gemma models, the binding signature is clearly expressed in the query/key subspaces of the relevant attention heads, whereas in Llama models, the binding information is carried primarily in key vectors. Overall, our results reveal an interpretable mechanism for context dependent state tracking in LLMs.
Soyoung Oh, Vera Demberg
Apr 22, 2026cs.CL

Slot Machines: How LLMs Keep Track of Multiple Entities

Language models must bind entities to the attributes they possess and maintain several such binding relationships within a context. We study how multiple entities are represented across token positions and whether single tokens can carry bindings for more than one entity. We introduce a multi-slot probing approach that disentangles a single token's residual stream activation to recover information about both the currently described entity and the immediately preceding one. These two kinds of information are encoded in separate and largely orthogonal "current-entity" and "prior-entity" slots. We analyze the functional roles of these slots and find that they serve different purposes. In tandem with the current-entity slot, the prior-entity slot supports relational inferences, such as entity-level induction ("who came after Alice in the story?") and conflict detection between adjacent entities. However, only the current-entity slot is used for explicit factual retrieval questions ("Is anyone in the story tall?" "What is the tall entity's name?") despite these answers being linearly decodable from the prior-entity slot too. Consistent with this limitation, open-weight models perform near chance accuracy at processing syntax that forces two subject-verb-object bindings on a single token (e.g., "Alice prepares and Bob consumes food.") Interestingly, recent frontier models can parse this properly, suggesting they may have developed more sophisticated binding strategies. Overall, our results expose a gap between information that is available in activations and information the model actually uses, and suggest that the current/prior-entity slot structure is a natural substrate for behaviors that require holding two perspectives at once, such as sycophancy and deception.
Paul C. Bogdan, Jack Lindsey
Apr 21, 2026cs.CL

Tracing Relational Knowledge Recall in Large Language Models

We study how large language models recall relational knowledge during text generation, with a focus on identifying latent representations suitable for relation classification via linear probes. Prior work shows how attention heads and MLPs interact to resolve subject, predicate, and object, but it remains unclear which representations support faithful linear relation classification and why some relation types are easier to capture linearly than others. We systematically evaluate different latent representations derived from attention head and MLP contributions, showing that per-head attention contributions to the residual stream are comparatively strong features for linear relation classification. Feature attribution analyses of the trained probes, as well as characteristics of the different relation types, reveal clear correlations between probe accuracy and relation specificity, entity connectedness, and how distributed the signal on which the probe relies is across attention heads. Finally, we show how token-level feature attribution of probe predictions can be used to reveal probe behavior in further detail.
Nicholas Popovič, Michael Färber