Does Text Steer Neural PDE Surrogates? A Controlled Diagnostic with OperatorCLIP

Activation-based control steers large language models (LLMs) by intervening on their internal representations during inference, and has emerged as an effective paradigm for controlling behaviors such as persona and style. However, existing methods often rely on fixed steering directions or task-specific intervention modules, making them difficult to adapt to fine-grained concepts and compositional constraints. We propose UniSteer, a text-guided activation flow matching model that learns a conditional distribution over residual-stream activations from natural-language conditions. Instead of fitting a separate intervention for each target behavior, UniSteer learns a universal conditional velocity field in activation space. At inference time, UniSteer performs flow inversion by partially transporting a source activation toward a latent state and regenerating it under a target textual condition before injecting it back into the frozen LLM. The same conditional model supports activation-space classification by selecting the textual label with the lowest reconstruction energy. Experiments on three target LLMs show that UniSteer provides a unified interface across behavioral control, truthfulness steering, fine-grained concept steering, multi-constraint instruction following, and activation-space classification.

Deployed large reasoning models (LRMs) often behave unexpectedly. Test-time steering controls LRM outputs by intervening on their hidden representations, but it can degrade output quality. We argue that prior steering work implicitly relies on internal features that detect behavior in already generated text. We show that these detection features are poor predictors of future behavioral outcomes, and thus not the natural intervention target. Instead, we train activation probes to predict future behavior likelihoods from intermediate reasoning steps. These probes predict the most likely behavior with 64%-91% accuracy, revealing a separate type of internal prediction features. Building on these prediction features, we introduce a text-level steering method, Future Probe Controlled Generation. FPCG samples multiple candidate sentences and chooses the best one according to a probe predicting the future behavior likelihood. This enables steering with almost no output quality degradation. FPCG also enables steering in several evaluations where activation steering fails. These results show that distinguishing detection and prediction features enables a more nuanced approach to controlling LRM behaviors.

Text-to-motion models generate plausible human motion but do not model a robot's dynamics; whole-body tracking controllers execute robot references reliably but cannot replan an infeasible one. Recent language-to-humanoid systems bridge this gap by training. We measure how much of the gap closes with no training at all, by putting the deployment controller itself in the loop. Sample-simulate-select (S$^3$) draws $N$ motions per prompt from a frozen text-to-motion model, retargets each to a Unitree G1 by direction-matching inverse kinematics, rolls all of them out under full rigid-body dynamics with the pretrained SONIC tracking policy, and keeps the candidate the policy executed best. Because the verifier is the deterministic simulator itself, S$^3$ attains the any-of-$N$ ceiling by construction; what we measure is where that ceiling lies and what falls short of it. On 200 stratified HumanML3D test prompts with $N=8$, upright execution rises from 83.5% to 89.5% and hardware-gate passes from 33 to 85; on the complete test split (4,184 prompts) it rises from 80.5% to 89.5%. A kinematic verifier that predicts falls well (AUROC 0.90) recovers only a quarter of this gain: ranking a prompt's own candidates is harder than classifying the population. What selection cannot fix is one class, prompts that lower the pelvis, which a generator trained on retargeted robot data does execute. We further score the semantic fidelity of the executed motion with the standard text-motion evaluator, with a real-mocap control that attributes the loss to the robot projection, ablate the retargeter against GMR (complementary failures: the any-of-8 ceiling rises to 95.0% over both), and execute all 177 gate-selected clips on the real G1: every one completes standing, with hardware tracking error matching simulation ($r=0.94$).