ActivationReasoning: Logical Reasoning in Latent Activation Spaces
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating fluent text, but their internal reasoning remains opaque and difficult to control. Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) make hidden activations more interpretable by exposing latent features that often align with human concepts. Yet, these features are fragile and passive, offering no mechanism for systematic reasoning or model control. To address this, we introduce ActivationReasoning (AR), a framework that embeds explicit logical reasoning into the latent space of LLMs. It proceeds in three stages: (1) Finding latent representations, first latent concept representations are identified (e.g., via SAEs) and organized into a dictionary; (2) Activating propositions, at inference time AR detects activating concepts and maps them to logical propositions; and (3)Logical reasoning, applying logical rules over these propositions to infer higher-order structures, compose new concepts, and steer model behavior. We evaluate AR on multi-hop reasoning (PrOntoQA), abstraction and robustness to indirect concept cues (Rail2Country), reasoning over natural and diverse language (ProverQA), and context-sensitive safety (BeaverTails). Across all tasks, AR scales robustly with reasoning complexity, generalizes to abstract and context-sensitive tasks, and transfers across model backbones. These results demonstrate that grounding logical structure in latent activations not only improves transparency but also enables structured reasoning, reliable control, and alignment with desired behaviors, providing a path toward more reliable and auditable AI.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 20 of its 80 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Oct 2025.
Builds on
20 of 80 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Report14 May
- 2024On Memorization of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoning30 Oct
- 2023Testing the General Deductive Reasoning Capacity of Large Language Models Using OOD Examples24 May
- 2022Selection-Inference: Exploiting Large Language Models for Interpretable Logical Reasoning19 May
Other references · 16
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
- 2023Steering Language Models With Activation Engineeringcited by 922
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 860
- 2024Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Spacecited by 797
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
- 2020Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignmentcited by 448
- 2024Gemma Scope: Open Sparse Autoencoders Everywhere All At Once on Gemma 2cited by 394
- 2025The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexitycited by 302
- 2020The Next Decade in AI: Four Steps Towards Robust Artificial Intelligencecited by 195
- 2025Position: Use Sparse Autoencoders to Discover Unknownscited by 19
- 2025SAEmnesia: Erasing Concepts in Diffusion Models with Supervised Sparse Autoencoderscited by 10
4 more
- 2021SLASH: Embracing Probabilistic Circuits into Neural Answer Set Programmingcited by 8
- 2025Deep Reinforcement Learning Agents are not even close to Human Intelligencecited by 8
- 2025Fodor and Pylyshyn's Legacy: Still No Human-like Systematic Compositionality in Neural Networkscited by 3
- 2025The Birth of Knowledge: Emergent Features across Time, Space, and Scale in Large Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026The Latent Space: Foundation, Evolution, Mechanism, Ability, and Outlookcited by 43
- 2026When Shallow Wins: Silent Failures and the Depth-Accuracy Paradox in Latent Reasoningcited by 3
- 2026Transcoders Trace Visual Grounding and Hallucinations in Vision-Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026MADS: Model-Aware Diverse Core Set Selection for Instruction Tuningcited by 0
- 2026Learning to Refine Hidden States for Reliable LLM Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026Learning to Refine Hidden States for Reliable LLM Reasoning16 Jun 2026
- 2026MADS: Model-Aware Diverse Core Set Selection for Instruction Tuning29 May 2026
- 2026Transcoders Trace Visual Grounding and Hallucinations in Vision-Language Models21 May 2026
- 2026The Latent Space: Foundation, Evolution, Mechanism, Ability, and Outlook2 Apr 2026
- 2026When Shallow Wins: Silent Failures and the Depth-Accuracy Paradox in Latent Reasoning3 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025A Comparative Analysis of Sparse Autoencoder and Activation Difference in Language Model Steering
- 2025I Have Covered All the Bases Here: Interpreting Reasoning Features in Large Language Models via Sparse Autoencoders
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Identify Reasoning Features in Language Models?
- 2025A Survey on Latent Reasoning
- 2024Uncovering Latent Chain of Thought Vectors in Language Models
- 2025Implicit Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey
- 2026Triggering Chain-of-Thought via Latent Feature Interventions in Large Language Models
- 2026Beyond Dense States: Sparse Transcoders as Causally Testable Operators for LLM Latent Reasoning