Evaluating Semantic Relation Knowledge through Bidirectional Relation Prediction from Gloss Pairs

Understanding whether large language models (LLMs) capture structured meaning requires examining how they represent concept relationships. In this work, we study three models of increasing scale: Pythia-70M, GPT-2, and Llama 3.1 8B, focusing on four semantic relations: synonymy, antonymy, hypernymy, and hyponymy. We combine linear probing with mechanistic interpretability techniques, including sparse autoencoders (SAE) and activation patching, to identify where these relations are encoded and how specific features contribute to their representation. Our results reveal a directional asymmetry in hierarchical relations: hypernymy is encoded redundantly and resists suppression, while hyponymy relies on compact features that are more easily disrupted by ablation. More broadly, relation signals are diffuse but exhibit stable profiles: they peak in the mid-layers and are stronger in post-residual/MLP pathways than in attention. Difficulty is consistent across models (antonymy easiest, synonymy hardest). Probe-level causality is capacity-dependent: on Llama 3.1, SAE-guided patching reliably shifts these signals, whereas on smaller models the shifts are weak or unstable. Our results clarify where and how reliably semantic relations are represented inside LLMs, and provide a reproducible framework for relating sparse features to probe-level causal evidence.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on text-to-knowledge graph generation and related tasks. Nevertheless, it is still unclear whether they accurately model the direction-dependent semantics of inverse relations, in which reversing the order of the arguments alters the meaning of a relation (e.g., mother versus child). To the best of our knowledge, this work presents the first systematic study of inverse relation directionality in LLMs, using a benchmark consisting of 5,457 instances spanning 27 distinct inverse relation labels. We evaluate five open-source LLMs under a multiple-choice prompting framework and further examine the influence of relation descriptions and entity representations by substituting the original entities with synthetic and masked entities. Our findings reveal systematic asymmetries in inverse relation classification across LLMs, indicate that relation descriptions do not consistently improve performance, and show that model performance can be sensitive to variations in entity representations.

When it comes to generating vector representations of words, current language models are achieving high-quality results. However, what is not known is the extent to which knowledge about semantic relations is represented in the geometry of the semantic spaces created in this way. In order to answer this question, we study the relation geometry of such semantic spaces from three perspectives. We first examine whether words standing in a particular relation to a target word~(called relata) occupy the same region in semantic space, and whether the regions corresponding to different relations are distinct from each other. We then verify to what extent semantic spaces reflect certain well-known properties of relations, such as symmetry, asymmetry, and transitivity. Finally, we consider which information about the target words and relata is more important for relation geometry: their surface forms, or their contexts. We conduct experiments on six semantic relations using causal, masked, and diffusion language models. The results show that relata in asymmetric relations relatively clearly occupy a distinct region in semantic space. Asymmetric relations' properties are only moderately well encoded in the semantic space, yet better than those of symmetric ones. Furthermore, when considering the question which information source has the strongest impact on results amongst the models we evaluated, we find that lexical information tends to be more important for the causal language model, whereas contextual information is more important for the masked and diffusion language models. Our results empirically show that relation geometry is not equally well-represented for all relations in semantic space, suggesting that there is a difference in how well semantic relations might be learned from distributional information alone.