A Calibrated Test of Internal Action Maps: State Signals Without Global Affine Closure

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.13626v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 05:41:24 GMT
• Title: A Calibrated Test of Internal Action Maps: State Signals Without Global Affine Closure
• Abstract summary: We test whether action maps fitted without a source reach its natural post-action activation and compose.<n>We organize the tests as an evidence lattice and validate the geometric branch on a known affine S_5 carrier.
• Score: 0.16921396880325776
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: A hidden state signal can be decodable or causally usable without supporting a reusable action map. We test whether action maps fitted without a source reach its natural post-action activation and compose. We organize the tests as an evidence lattice and validate the geometric branch on a known affine S_5 carrier: all held-source folds pass one-step, composition, inverse, decoding, and commutativity gates. Structured curvature and held-domain conjugacy raise error monotonically, but only 23/30 strongest cells flip a closure gate, bounding rather than universalizing calibration. In post-trained Qwen/Qwen3-4B, frozen final-token h28 affine maps have mean held-entity error .519, versus .398 for within-test-domain cross-fit. Seven randomized entity splits and map geometry do not support a purely entity-specific account. Earlier h4/h16 layers fit one-step transitions better, but h4 conflict-state decoding is weak and lexical controls remain unresolved. Three matched intervention datasets regenerated from one frozen checkpoint show causal effects only at h28/h36. Outcome-aware refitting improves h28 one-step error to .474 (.469 with weighting), yet no refit passes composition. Learned finite worlds likewise preserve relative algebraic signals or shared charts without held-source affine closure. Within the tested carriers, state availability, causal use, local geometry, and reusable closure are separable. The result is limited to one pretrained model, sampled final-token layers, two finite worlds, and the tested affine or diagnostic function classes.

Related papers

• Wrong Prediction, Right Answer: Recovering Evidence from Collapsed LLM Sequence Scores [31.709549159768727]
  We observe a consistent readout gap across diverse reasoning benchmarks.<n> hidden-state probes successfully decode correct answers even when native sequence scoring completely collapses.<n>Our results show that many apparent zero-shot reasoning deficits are expression failures masking intact internal logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-31T16:43:55Z)
• Feature Priming in Online Linear Regression: Sparse-Regret Lower Bounds and a Tight Univariate Rate [47.36630149538994]
  In high-dimensional online prediction, the best predictor may depend on only a few features, so regret should scale with sparsity rather than the ambient dimension.<n>Warmuth and Amid asked at COLT 2023 whether any of three such rules admits a competitive online regret guarantee.<n>Our analysis identifies a common obstruction: cheap nuisance causes the refit to underweight the truly predictive coordinate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-18T09:32:03Z)
• Why Does the Future Branch? Identifiable Closure Tests for Stochastic Physical World Models [0.0]
  ClosurePairs crosses compatible microstates with repeated disturbances.<n>It recovers source attribution at unchanged likelihood.<n>It reduces equal-budget decomposition error in a nonlinear interaction benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-01T11:07:24Z)
• Knowledge before Reasoning: EC-Reason-Bench, a Training-Free Diagnostic Benchmark for LLM Enzyme Classification [36.44850004100564]
  We propose EC-Reason-Bench, a training-free, diagnostic evaluation protocol built to answer two questions.<n>First, external knowledge is decisive and must precede reasoning.<n>Second, in closed-book settings, whether cascading and chain-of-thought help or hurt depends on a model's tendency to abstain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T02:16:09Z)
• TwistedMerge: Certified Higher-Order Diagnostics and Abstention for Model Merging [0.48086260459837454]
  We formulate merging as a finite descent problem in which checkpoints are local objects, alignment maps are transitions, and cycle products are residuals.<n>We prove a constant-edge no-go result, frozen-complex three-way and pre-family error-control theorems, and a refinement test for comparison-complex sensitivity.<n>A trained low-rank-adapter audit shows that naive factor averaging depends on the chosen GLr representative, whereas global factor synchronization and dense-delta SVD are stable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T03:24:50Z)
• Forgetting Is Not a Fix: Path Dependence in Sequential Engram Editing [35.76482964927589]
  We test the hypothesis that concept-specific memory traces become linear objects that can be extracted once and combined arithmetically.<n>We run that test on the authors' own reference implementation, at their reported best edit strength.<n>For unlearning-as-compliance: erasure certified today does not certify the artifact after its next edit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T23:45:06Z)
• EnTrust: Modeling Inter-Modal Conflict for Trustworthy Multimodal Medical Image Analysis [41.67522319355107]
  EnTrust is a framework that treats inter-modal conflict as the primary source of predictive uncertainty.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art segmentation accuracy while reducing calibration error by 40% compared to the strongest baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-19T12:43:50Z)
• What Accuracy and Gradient Cosine Miss: Evaluating Feedback Alignment via Scale Stability, Reference Validity, and Depth Utility [48.10132234701036]
  We propose a diagnostic evaluation protocol based on three checks -- scale stability, reference validity, and depth utility -- together with per-layer rather than aggregate cosine reporting.<n>Across multiple architectures and methods, our protocol identifies all failures with wide calibration margins.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-19T06:04:17Z)
• Distributional Energy-Based Models for Uncertainty-Aware Structured LLM Reasoning [40.342912574072024]
  Large Language Models produce structured outputs such as travel plans or code solutions.<n>Individual reasoning steps may appear correct while the output as a whole violates budgets, fails test cases, or contradicts earlier deductions.<n>We propose a learned quality scorer with deterministic analytical constraint penalties for verifying structured LLM outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-15T17:08:27Z)
• PBT-Bench: Benchmarking AI Agents on Property-Based Testing [29.035258104995204]
  We introduce PBT-Bench, a benchmark of 100 curated property-based testing problems across 40 real Python libraries.<n>Each problem injects one or more semantic bugs (365 in total, mean 3.65 per problem) designed so that default-strategy random inputs almost never trigger them.<n>Bug recall under the PBT-guided prompt ranges from 42.1% to 83.4% across models; under the open-ended baseline, from 31.4% to 76.7%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T18:01:05Z)
• ATLAS: Constitution-Conditioned Latent Geometry and Redistribution Across Language Models and Neural Perturbation Data [0.0]
  Constitution-conditioned post-training can be analysed as a structured perturbation of a model's learned representational geometry.<n>We introduce ATLAS, a geometry-first program that traces constitution-induced hidden-state structure across charts, models, and substrates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-19T23:26:02Z)
• The Attribution Impossibility: No Feature Ranking Is Faithful, Stable, and Complete Under Collinearity [0.0]
  No feature ranking can be simultaneously faithful, stable, and complete when features are collinear.<n>We prove this impossibility, quantify it for four model classes, resolve it via ensemble averaging (DASH), and machine-verify it with 305 Lean 4 theorems.<n>The design space theorem, diagnostics, and impossibility are mechanically verified in Lean 4 (305 theorems from 16 axioms, 0 sorry) -- to our knowledge, the first formally verified impossibility in explainable AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T10:11:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.