mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Localized Definitions and Distributed Reasoning: A Proof-of-Concept Mechanistic Interpretability Study via Activation Patching

arXiv 2504.02976 ↗First posted 3 Apr 2025cs.LG cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Steering and interpreting LLM reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

This study investigates the localization of knowledge representation in fine-tuned GPT-2 models using Causal Layer Attribution via Activation Patching (CLAP), a method that identifies critical neural layers responsible for correct answer generation. The model was fine-tuned on 9,958 PubMed abstracts (epilepsy: 20,595 mentions, EEG: 11,674 mentions, seizure: 13,921 mentions) using two configurations with validation loss monitoring for early stopping. CLAP involved (1) caching clean (correct answer) and corrupted (incorrect answer) activations, (2) computing logit difference to quantify model preference, and (3) patching corrupted activations with clean ones to assess recovery. Results revealed three findings: First, patching the first feedforward layer recovered 56% of correct preference, demonstrating that associative knowledge is distributed across multiple layers. Second, patching the final output layer completely restored accuracy (100% recovery), indicating that definitional knowledge is localised. The stronger clean logit difference for definitional questions further supports this localized representation. Third, minimal recovery from convolutional layer patching (13.6%) suggests low-level features contribute marginally to high-level reasoning. Statistical analysis confirmed significant layer-specific effects (p<0.01). These findings demonstrate that factual knowledge is more localized and associative knowledge depends on distributed representations. We also showed that editing efficacy depends on task type. Our findings not only reconcile conflicting observations about localization in model editing but also emphasize on using task-adaptive techniques for reliable, interpretable updates.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Steering and interpreting LLM reasoning, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 0 of its 1 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Apr 2025.

Builds on

0 of 1 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Mechanistic Interpretability of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning via Sequential Activation Patching
  2. 2024Causal Interventions on Causal Paths: Mapping GPT-2's Reasoning From Syntax to Semantics
  3. 2026Towards Mechanistically Understanding Why Memorized Knowledge Fails to Generalize in Large Language Model Finetuning
  4. 2026COMPASS: Finding Where Reasoning Lives in Language Models
  5. 2025How does Chain of Thought Think? Mechanistic Interpretability of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning with Sparse Autoencoding
  6. 2023Towards Best Practices of Activation Patching in Language Models: Metrics and Methods
  7. 2026Causally Grounded Mechanistic Interpretability for LLMs with Faithful Natural-Language Explanations
  8. 2025Far from the Shallow: Brain-Predictive Reasoning Embedding through Residual Disentanglement