We investigate whether language models contain internal components that contribute to representing narrativity, the degree to which a text exhibits narrative properties. Across GPT-2-Small, Gemma-2-2B, and Llama-3.1-8B, we identify attention heads, MLP neurons, and sparse autoencoder features whose activations correlate with narrativity. Ablating selected neuron and feature sets increases next-token prediction loss more for high-narrativity than for low-narrativity texts, and reduces the narrativity of open-ended generations. On downstream benchmarks, the largest effects occur in story completion and narrative question answering, although they vary across models and languages; results on confabulation and hallucination benchmarks are mixed. These findings provide causal evidence that selected sets of narrative-associated components contribute to model behaviour, while their internal organisation, relation to narrative theory, and broader functions remain open questions.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Narrative features can be interpreted along three dimensions: agency, event and world.
Figure 2: Finding NarraHeads, NarraNeurons and NarraFeatures in transformer layers.
Figure 3: Mean activation of each component in Llama on low vs. high NarraDetect texts. Red marks NarraComponents. Components with a zero mean in either group are omitted.
Figure 4: Change in loss correlates with narrativity when ablating NarraComponents inside Llama.
Component
n
%
Narra
Random
GPT
NarraHead
2
1.4
− .01
[ − .10, .10]
.06
[ − .01, .13]
NarraNeuron
2534
6.9
.84
[.81, .87]
− .04
[ − .12, .04]
NarraFeature
695
0.2
.83
[.80, .86]
.01
[ − .08, .10]
Gemma
NarraHead
3
1.4
.13
[.03, .22]
− .06
[ − .15, .02]
Table 1: NVCloss when ablating NarraComponents vs. random: mean [95% bootstrap CIs].
Category
GPT2
Gemma
Llama
( n=695 )
( n=2529 )
( n=1211 )
Agency
33.7%
40.2%
34.4%
Event sequence
29.4%
21.7%
34.2%
World building
37.0%
38.1%
31.5%
Table 2: Percentage of NarraFeatures assigned to each dimension.
% of features
Word
Top
All
Agency
Event
World
4434
1666
1167
1601
action
Event
23
15
33
24
interaction
World
16
11
18
19
emotional
Agency
12
14
7
13
character
World
11
9
10
13
Table 3: The 10 most common words in the auto-generated explanations of NarraFeatures.
Macro-F1
GPT2
Gemma
Llama
695
2529
1210
Embedding Classifier
.53
.57
.58
DeepSeek Zero-shot
.50
.47
.48
Chance
.33
.33
.33
Table 4: Predicting a NarraFeature’s top narrativity dimension from its auto-generated explanation.
Figure 5: Llama’s NarraComponents activate more for stories than explanations. Activations are max-normalised per component and averaged; one point per topic pair.
Story
Explanation
Agency
Event
World
Agency
Event
World
Gemma
3.80
3.15
3.13
2.17
1.78
2.24
Llama
4.05
3.27
3.28
1.78
1.49
1.96
Table 5: Mean narrativity (1–5) of zero-shot generations, prompted for a story or an explanation.
Features ( n )
Judge score
Model
by top dim.
Ag.
Ev.
Wo.
Gemma-2-2B
agency (1016)
0.82
0.74
0.72
event (549)
0.84
0.88
0.83
world (964)
0.76
0.81
0.89
Llama-3.1-8B
agency (416)
0.82
0.73
0.70
event (414)
0.82
0.89
0.84
Table 6: Spearman ρ between NarraFeature contributions and narrativity. 95% bootstrap ≤± 0.04.
Target
Random
Ag.
Ev.
Wo.
Ag.
Ev.
Wo.
Gemma
NarraHeads
− .15
− .17
− .13
− .13
− .13
− .12
± .08
± .08
± .06
± .15
± .16
± .13
NarraNeurons
− .67
− .75
− .47
− .11
− .09
− .08
± .10
± .09
± .07
± .10
± .10
± .07
Table 7: ΔNarrativity after ablating NarraComponents vs. random with ± 95% CI. Bold: Target differs from Random (paired bootstrap over prompts, two-sided, p<.05 , uncorrected).
Story
Explanation
Agency
Event
World
Agency
Event
World
Gemma
agency
− 2.48
− 1.96
− 1.60
− 1.09
− 0.70
− 0.75
event
− 1.19
− 1.55
− 0.92
− 0.30
− 0.41
− 0.23
world
− 1.10
− 1.17
− 0.77
− 0.22
− 0.32
− 0.24
Llama
Table 8: ΔNarrativity after ablation of NarraFeature categories. Bold: drop that is significantly larger than the next-largest drop (paired bootstrap over prompts, two-sided, p<.05 , uncorrected). 95% bootstrap CIs ≤±0.15 .
Prompt: Write a story concerning repairing a bicycle.
Abl.
A/E/W
Generation (abridged)
none
5/5/4.5
I was riding my bike to the store […] I saw a car coming towards me. I swerved […] hit a pothole and fell off my bike.
agency
1 /2.5/2
Repairing a bicycle is a task that requires patience […] The first step in repairing a bicycle is to identify the problem.
event
4/ 2 /3
[…] The boy’s name is John. […] It has a flat tire. He can’t ride it. He wants to ride it. He wants to go to the park. […]
world
5/5/ 4
I was riding my bicycle when I got a flat tire. […] I was very happy and I rode my bicycle home.
Table 9: Llama generations after ablating each dimension’s NarraFeatures. Scores: Agency/Event/World (1–5).
Story completion (XStoryCloze)
Question Answering (QA)
Hallucination/Confabulation
EN
RU
ZH
HI
Cosmos
OpenBook
TruthfulQA
FaithDial
BEGIN
Gemma-2-2B (2529 features, 3 heads, 3470 neurons)
Base
82.7
74.7
73.3
63.7
42.6
69.4
25.0
67.6
85.5
NarraFeatures
− 9.1 ± 2.3
− 7.6 ± 2.3
− 5.0 ± 2.0
− 5.3 ± 1.7
− 2.8 ± 2.2
+2.6 ± 2.5
+2.8 ± 2.2
− 2.0 ± 1.2
+0.5 ± 1.6
Heads
− 0.3 ± 1.0
+0.7 ± 1.2
− 0.5 ± 1.0
− 0.5 ± 1.0
− 0.5 ± 1.4
+2.3 ± 1.1
− 0.8 ± 1.0
+0.3 ± 0.5
− 0.1 ± 0.7
Neurons
− 1.3 ± 1.2
− 2.2 ± 1.5
− 1.3 ± 1.3
− 0.9 ± 1.2
+0.5 ± 1.7
+0.4 ± 1.2
+0.8 ± 1.3
− 0.2 ± 0.7
+0.7 ± 0.8
Table 10: Effect of ablating NarraFeatures, NarraHeads and NarraNeurons relative to ablating the same number of random units: Δ Target −Δ Rand (pp), with 95% bootstrap CIs. Bold : Δ NarraFeatures differ significantly from Δ Rand ( red : below, blue : above) (paired bootstrap, two-sided, p<.05 , uncorrected). Full table with separate Δ Target and Δ Rand in Appendix J .
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Judge
Overall
Agency
Event
World
Hy3
.886 [.867, .902]
.831 [.804, .853]
.838 [.803, .867]
.855 [.830, .877]
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
.888 [.868, .904]
.850 [.826, .870]
.846 [.816, .871]
.869 [.848, .888]
Gemma-4-31B
.898 [.880, .913]
.858 [.837, .877]
.840 [.807, .868]
.853 [.831, .871]
GLM-4-32B
.883 [.861, .901]
.857 [.834, .877]
.845 [.815, .869]
.795 [.761, .823]
Qwen3.5-27B
.882 [.862, .897]
.835 [.805, .861]
.868 [.846, .886]
.809 [.776, .836]
Appendix
Table 11: Spearman ρ between LLM-judge narrativity ratings and the mean of three human annotators ( n=394 passages). Brackets give 95% bootstrap CIs.
Topic type
Topics
Entities & agents
a teacher; a dog; an octopus; an alien; a dragon; a robot; a family; a team of explorers; a colony of ants; a mermaid
Objects
a key; a photograph; a clock; a letter; a map; a ring; a telescope; an ancient coin; a magic mirror; a time machine
Places & environments
a kitchen; a library; a marketplace; a forest; a river; an abandoned station; a deep-sea trench; a distant planet; a floating city; an enchanted forest
friendship; kinship; cooperation; trust between strangers; rivalry; authority; belonging; estrangement; dependence; exclusion from a group
Activities & processes
gardening; learning a language; preparing a meal; repairing a bicycle; painting; building a bridge; migration; metamorphosis; erosion; brewing a magic potion
Appendix
Table 12: The 90 topics of the open-ended generation prompts, ten per topic type. Each topic fills the <topic> slot of all five templates in both conditions.
Agency
Event
World
Target
Random
Target
Random
Target
Random
n
Gemma
Keep all
− 1.86
− 0.36
− 1.40
− 0.44
− 1.27
− 0.36
900
Excl. ≥0.8
− 1.92
− 0.37
− 1.45
− 0.46
− 1.31
− 0.36
736
Excl. ≥0.6
− 2.02
− 0.37
− 1.55
− 0.45
− 1.37
− 0.35
409
Excl. ≥0.4
− 2.09
− 0.31
− 1.81
− 0.49
− 1.45
− 0.33
137
Appendix
Table 13: ΔNarrativity (1–5 scale) after SAE Target ablation and size-matched random ablation (Random, mean of 10 seeds), keeping every prompt or excluding prompts whose unablated or ablated generation is degenerate at three seq-rep-4 thresholds. n : prompts kept in all 11 arms. In every setting, every SAE Target cell stays below every random seed. Bold: Target differs from Random (paired bootstrap over prompts, two-sided, p<.05 , uncorrected).
Abl.
A/E/W
Generation (first 30 words)
Prompt T091_P03
none
4.5/4.5/4
I wrote a story about a man who lived in a desert. He had a well that was his only source of water. One day, a man came to his […]
agency
2/3.5/3
Water is a precious resource that is essential for life. Competition for water can arise due to various factors such as population growth, climate change, and economic development. In this […]
event
5/4/4
I am going to write a story about a man who is competing for water. The man is in a desert. He is thirsty. He is looking for water. He […]
world
3.5/3.5/3
I wrote a story about a man who is trying to get water for his crops. He has to go to the river to get water, but there is a […]
Prompt T068_P02
Appendix
Table 14: Llama story prompts drawn at random (seed 0), unablated and after each category ablation. Scores: mean of 2 LLM judges (1–5).
Model
rep-4
Generation (first 60 words)
Gemma
0.63
I have a lot of experience in gardening because it is a hobby of mine to grow plants and flowers in the garden that is why it is important to be able to care for plants and flowers in order to be able to grow healthy and beautiful plants and flowers in the garden that is why it is important […]
Gemma
–
(empty)
Gemma
0.72
Kinship is a relationship between two or more people who are related by blood, marriage, or adoption to each other in a family or social group that is recognized by law or custom as a family or social group that is recognized by law or custom as a family or social group that is recognized by law or custom as […]
Gemma
0.65
I’m sorry to hear about the loss of a loved one is never easy to deal with, but it is important to remember that time heals all wounds, and that you are not alone in this difficult time of grief and loss of a loved one is never easy to deal with, but it is important to remember that time […]
Llama
0.86
Photographs are a way of capturing a moment in time. Photographs" are a way of capturing a moment in time. Photographs are a way of capturing a moment in time. Photographs are a way of capturing a moment in time. Photographs are a way of capturing a moment in time. Photographs are a way of capturing a moment in time. […]
Llama
0.73
I am a writer of fiction. Fiction is a story that is not true" (Fiction 1). Fiction is a story that is not true, but it can be based on a true story. Fiction is a story that is not true, but it can be based on a true story. Fiction is a story that is not true, but it […]
Appendix
Table 15: Degenerate generations under SAE Target ablation, 4 per model drawn at random (seed 0). rep-4: word-level seq-rep-4.
Story completion (XStoryCloze)
Question Answering (QA)
Hallucination/Confabulation
EN
RU
ZH
HI
Cosmos
OpenBook
TruthfulQA
FaithDial
BEGIN
Gemma-2-2B (2529 features, 3 heads, 3470 neurons)
Base
82.7
74.7
73.3
63.7
42.6
69.4
25.0
67.6
85.5
Δ NarraFeatures
− 11.6 ± 2.3
− 10.2 ± 2.2
− 6.1 ± 2.0
− 5.4 ± 1.9
− 6.2 ± 1.6
− 0.5 ± 0.8
+3.4 ± 2.4
− 3.2 ± 1.3
+0.1 ± 1.6
Δ Rand
− 2.6 ± 1.3
− 2.6 ± 1.6
− 1.0 ± 1.1
− 0.1 ± 1.0
− 3.4 ± 2.0
− 3.1 ± 2.4
+0.6 ± 1.4
− 1.2 ± 0.9
− 0.4 ± 1.0
Δ Heads
− 1.0 ± 0.9
− 0.5 ± 0.9
− 0.9 ± 0.9
− 0.4 ± 1.0
− 2.2 ± 0.9
+0.3 ± 0.5
− 0.9 ± 1.0
+0.6 ± 0.5
− 0.3 ± 0.7
Appendix
Table 16: Effect of ablating NarraFeatures, narrativity-selective attention heads and MLP neurons (all units with ρ≥0.5 ), as in Table 10 . Each indented Δ Rand row is the matched-size random baseline for the unit row directly above it.
Large language model (LLM) interpretability studies how internal representations and computations produce outputs, and how they can be explained or controlled.
The narrative composition of web-scale LLM pretraining corpora remains largely unexplored, even though narrative is a fundamental mode of human communication. We present the first fine-grained study of narrative features in Dolma, a 3-trillion-token open pretraining corpus. Drawing on narrative theory, we design a framework spanning three core narrative elements (agency, setting, and events) operationalized as 11 interpretable dimensions. After curating and hand-annotating a diverse set of 400 passages, we create an LLM-labeled dataset of 25K passages, and finally, we finetune and validate NarraBERT, two RoBERTa-based models for fine-grained narrative prediction. We apply NarraBERT to 13M passages, resulting in a new dataset, NarraDolma. We find that narrative structure is measurable at scale across extremely heterogeneous data and narrative qualities are unequally distributed across pretraining sources, topics, and formats in ways that current data curation practices neither measure nor account for. Our framework, dataset, and analyses provide a foundation for understanding how narrative qualities are distributed in LLM pretraining data.
Teagan Johnson, Elliott Ash, Andrew Piper +1
University of Colorado Boulder · ETH Zürich · McGill University
This study proposes a quantitative framework for profiling LLM dispositions as stable, model-specific regularities in output under repeated, controlled elicitation. Using a structured narrative constraint-selection task administered across six frontier models and three instruction types, we operationalize disposition through two dimensions: "consistency", measured as cross-replication selection overlap via Jaccard similarity, and "diversity", measured as dispersion across options via the inverse Simpson index. We further introduce Narrative Landscape, a PCA-based visualization that maps each model's selection profile into a shared space for direct comparison. Results reveal a clear rigidity-exploration spectrum across model families and show that instruction types shift the geometry of selection spaces even when scalar metrics appear similar, indicating that comparable scores can mask qualitatively distinct selection topologies.
Donghoon Jung, Jiwoo Choi, Songeun Chae +1
School of Digital Humanities and Computational Social Sciences, KAIST, South Korea
Do language models carry information about narrative events before writing them, and how far ahead? We examine narrative lookahead through salient, state-changing events rather than tokens or response-level attributes. We extract 23,355 LLM-annotated events from 2,000 stories generated by four open-weight LLMs, labeling them along three nonexclusive dimensions of change: within agents, between agents, and in the story world, with human validation on a subset. Event segmentation and plot-independent labels enable comparisons across stories at horizons measured in events rather than in tokens. At event ends, we probe hidden states for upcoming event types and compare predictions with text-only predictors using matched prefixes. Across four models, future event types are decodable above prevalence baselines for at least four subsequent events, but probes significantly outperform both primary text-only predictors only for the next event. In exploratory steering with OLMo-3.1-32B, a probe-derived direction shifts the proportion of the target event type in both intended directions at higher strengths. Our event-level approach links the prediction of future narrative developments to interventions that reshape subsequent event composition.
Donghoon Jung, Min Kim, Seojin Choi +2
School of Digital Humanities and Computational Social Sciences, KAIST, South Korea