mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Self-Interpretability: LLMs Can Describe Complex Internal Processes that Drive Their Decisions

arXiv 2505.17120 ↗First posted 21 May 2025cs.CLcited by 25

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We have only limited understanding of how and why large language models (LLMs) respond in the ways that they do. Their neural networks have proven challenging to interpret, and we are only beginning to tease out the function of individual neurons and circuits within them. However, another path to understanding these systems is to investigate and develop their capacity to explain their own functioning. Here, we show that i) LLMs can accurately describe quantitative features of their own internal processes during certain kinds of decision-making and ii) that it is possible to improve these capabilities through training. To do so, we fine-tuned GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini to make decisions in a wide variety of complex contexts (e.g., choosing between condos, loans, vacations, etc.) according to randomly-generated, quantitative preferences about how to weigh different attributes (e.g., the relative importance of natural light versus quiet surroundings for condos). We demonstrate that the LLMs can accurately report these preferences (i.e., the weights that they learned to give to different attributes during decision-making). Next, we demonstrate that these LLMs can be fine-tuned to explain their decision-making even more accurately. Finally, we demonstrate that this training generalizes: It improves the ability of the models to accurately explain how they make other complex decisions, not just decisions they have been fine-tuned to make. This work is a step towards training LLMs to accurately and broadly report on their own internal processes -- a possibility that would yield substantial benefits for interpretability, control, and safety.

Key facts. Cited by 25 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2025.

Builds on

20 of 43 references.

References · 20

  1. 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
  2. 2023A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questionscited by 1,601
  3. 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,122
  4. 2023Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 639
  5. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
  6. 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
  7. 2024Mechanistic Interpretability for AI Safety -- A Reviewcited by 422
  8. 2025Reasoning Models Don't Always Say What They Thinkcited by 415
  9. 2025Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscationcited by 384
  10. 2020A Survey of the State of Explainable AI for Natural Language Processingcited by 206
  11. 2024Black-Box Access is Insufficient for Rigorous AI Auditscited by 126
  12. 2024A Practical Review of Mechanistic Interpretability for Transformer-Based Language Modelscited by 118
8 more
  1. 2024Looking Inward: Language Models Can Learn About Themselves by Introspectioncited by 113
  2. 2023Faithfulness Tests for Natural Language Explanationscited by 107
  3. 2022Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk?cited by 105
  4. 2025Tell me about yourself: LLMs are aware of their learned behaviorscited by 91
  5. 2024Me, Myself, and AI: The Situational Awareness Dataset (SAD) for LLMscited by 84
  6. 2025Metacognition and Uncertainty Communication in Humans and Large Language Modelscited by 23
  7. 2023Towards Evaluating AI Systems for Moral Status Using Self-Reportscited by 22
  8. 2025Will AI Tell Lies to Save Sick Children? Litmus-Testing AI Values Prioritization with AIRiskDilemmascited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 19.

25 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2026Verbalizable Representations Form a Global Workspace in Language Modelscited by 75
  2. 2025Training Language Models to Explain Their Own Computationscited by 30
  3. 2025Persistent Instability in LLM's Personality Measurements: Effects of Scale, Reasoning, and Conversation Historycited by 26
  4. 2025Large Language Models Report Subjective Experience Under Self-Referential Processingcited by 19
  5. 2026Counterfactual Simulation Training for Chain-of-Thought Faithfulnesscited by 17
  6. 2026A Positive Case for Faithfulness: LLM Self-Explanations Help Predict Model Behaviorcited by 13
  7. 2025Evidence for Limited Metacognition in LLMscited by 12
  8. 2026Can LLMs Introspect? A Reality Checkcited by 12
  9. 2026Introspection Adapters: Training LLMs to Report Their Learned Behaviorscited by 11
  10. 2026Emergent Introspection in AI is Content-Agnosticcited by 7
  11. 2026Verbalizing LLMs' assumptions to explain and control sycophancycited by 5
  12. 2026The Consciousness Cluster: Emergent preferences of Models that Claim to be Consciouscited by 5
13 more
  1. 2026Introspective Coupling: Self-Explanation Training Tracks Behavioral Change Despite Fixed Supervisioncited by 4
  2. 2026No Reliable Evidence of Self-Reported Sentience in Small Large Language Modelscited by 3
  3. 2026Consciousness with the Serial Numbers Filed Off: Measuring Trained Denial in 115 AI Modelscited by 2
  4. 2025Tailored Behavior-Change Messaging for Physical Activity: Integrating Contextual Bandits and Large Language Modelscited by 1
  5. 2025Artificial Phantasia: Emergent Mental Imagery in Large Language Modelscited by 1
  6. 2026Quantitative Introspection in Language Models: Tracking Emotive States Across Conversationcited by 1
  7. 2026Characterizing the Consistency of the Emergent Misalignment Personacited by 1
  8. 2026Self-CTRL: Self-Consistency Training with Reinforcement Learningcited by 1
  9. 2026Metacognition in LLMs: Foundations, Progress, and Opportunitiescited by 1
  10. 2026Position: It's Time to Optimize LLMs for Self-Consistencycited by 1
  11. 2026Evaluating and Improving LLM Self-Modelingcited by 1
  12. 2026Do as I Say, Not as I Do: Instruction-Induction Conflict in LLMscited by 0
  13. 2026Language Models Act on Hidden Valencecited by 0

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Understanding Large Language Models
  2. 2025Teaching LLMs to Think Mathematically: A Critical Study of Decision-Making via Optimization
  3. 2026From Plausible to Actionable: A Position on LLM Self-Explanations
  4. 2026IDEA: An Interpretable and Editable Decision-Making Framework for LLMs via Verbal-to-Numeric Calibration
  5. 2026Automated Concept Discovery for LLM-as-a-Judge Preference Analysis
  6. 2025Risk Profiling and Modulation for LLMs
  7. 2024Cognitive LLMs: Towards Integrating Cognitive Architectures and Large Language Models for Manufacturing Decision-making
  8. 2024Large Language Models are Interpretable Learners