Do Knowledge and Reasoning Oriented Benchmarks Induce Stable Representation Signatures in LLMs?
Organizations: EPFL, Idiap Research Institute · Independent Researcher
Abstract
Internal signatures could support monitoring, adaptive computation, and mechanistic analysis, but benchmark prompts can be separable without any shared computational distinction. We test whether a prespecified knowledge/reasoning label defines a reusable internal signature in five contemporary 7B to 31B models. We treat the task as the unit of inference probes hold out complete tasks, labels are permuted across tasks, and the best layer and stream are reselected for every permutation. Raw probes recover an eight-versus-eight-subject MMLU partition in all five models (macro-F1 --), but prompt text predicts it nearly as well: under an identical probe configuration, the activation advantage is only -- macro-F1 and is not significant. At the prespecified level, lexical adjustment removes significance while the adjusted states still identify individual subjects, and the selected site changes across task panels and selection rules. Additionally, two released base-training trajectories show no common direction. These pooled layerwise measures recover the task label but identify no transferable knowledge/reasoning signature at the tested sensitivity, which cannot exclude moderate effects. The resulting protocol gives future internal monitors and intervention studies a sequence of tests to pass. Project page: https://parsa-ra.github.io/lmbehave/.
Figures & tables
| Model (checkpoints) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OLMo 3 7B (7) | |||||
| Apertus 1.0 8B (11) | |||||
| Reference | chance | chance | : equal projected means | ||
| Model | MMLU site / mean-shift ratio | max | raw macro-F1 / | matched macro-F1 / | lexical-64 macro-F1 / |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OLMo 3 7B | 3 / FFN / 0.221 | 0.0721 | |||
| Apertus 1.5 8B | 0 / FFN / 0.284 | 0.00435 | |||
| Qwen 3.5 9B | 2 / FFN / 0.616 | 0.00109 | |||
| Qwen 3.5 27B | 1 / token mixing / 0.667 | 0.000777 | |||
| Gemma 4 31B | 23 / FFN / 0.499 | 0.0145 |
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Model | Revision | Layers | Storage | Batch |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OLMo 3 7B Instruct | 6e5971d | 32 | float32 | 32 |
| Apertus 1.5 8B | a411d83 | 32 | float32 | 24 |
| Qwen 3.5 9B | c202236 | 32 | float32 | 20 |
| Qwen 3.5 27B | fc05dae | 64 | float32 | 8 |
| Gemma 4 31B IT | 842da37 | 60 | float32 | 2 |
| Model | Mean-shift maximum | Raw probe | Surface+modality | Lexical-64 | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen 3.5 9B | , L0-T ( ) | ( ) | ( ) | ( ) | ( ) |
| Qwen 3.5 27B | , L5-T ( ) | ( ) | ( ) | ( ) | ( ) |
| Gemma 4 31B | , L36-R ( ) | ( ) | ( ) | ( ) | ( ) |
| Measurement at selected site | Qwen 9B | Qwen 27B | Gemma 31B | Reference | Role |
| RBF probe macro-F1 | Nonlinear prediction; descriptive here | ||||
| Cosine silhouette | Higher means greater distance-based separation | ||||
| Covariance alignment | Lower means less similar unpaired geometry | ||||
| Within-group effective-rank fraction | Lower means a more concentrated spectrum | ||||
| Within-group stable rank | — | Scale-dependent spectral concentration diagnostic | |||
| Paired linear CKA | — | — | — | Undefined: zero declared cross-group pairs |
| Family | Reference value | Scientific role |
|---|---|---|
| Mean shift | : equal projected means; : squared mean shift equals summed within-category variance | Within-model mean separation; numerator and denominator remain visible. |
| Probe | : balanced chance | Prediction for tasks excluded from probe fitting; task-label permutations define the null. |
| Geometry | Silhouette : no distance advantage; alignment : identical normalized geometry | Cohesion and similarity; paired CKA is reported only for actual pairs. |
| Rank | : maximally even spectrum | Contraction diagnostic, not separation evidence by itself. |
| Model | Matched-64 /exact | Null mean SD; q95 | PCA-95 /exact |
|---|---|---|---|
| OLMo 3 7B | |||
| Apertus 1.5 8B | |||
| Qwen 3.5 9B | |||
| Qwen 3.5 27B | |||
| Gemma 4 31B |
| Model | Mean-shift site | Exact range | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OLMo 3 7B | 3 / feed-forward | 21 / residual | 20 / residual | 6 / residual | – |
| Apertus 1.5 8B | 0 / feed-forward | 18 / residual | 4 / residual | 4 / residual | – |
| Qwen 3.5 9B | 2 / feed-forward | 30 / residual | 30 / residual | 30 / residual | – |
| Qwen 3.5 27B | 1 / token mixing | 25 / token mixing | 25 / token mixing | 25 / token mixing | – |
| Gemma 4 31B | 23 / feed-forward | 31 / token mixing | 31 / token mixing | 22 / token mixing | – |
| Standardized mean difference | Directions | Exact | Macro-F1 mean [range] |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | ||
| 10 | 0 | ||
| 10 | 0 | ||
| 10 | 0 | ||
| 10 | 5 |
LLM Interpretability
Large language model (LLM) interpretability studies how internal representations and computations produce outputs, and how they can be explained or controlled.
See all 781 papers