RAPTOR: Ridge-Adaptive Logistic Probes
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Probing studies what information is encoded in a frozen LLM's layer representations by training a lightweight predictor on top of them. Beyond analysis, probes are often used operationally in probe-then-steer pipelines: a learned concept vector is extracted from a probe and injected via additive activation steering by adding it to a layer representation during the forward pass. The effectiveness of this pipeline hinges on estimating concept vectors that are accurate, directionally stable under ablation, and inexpensive to obtain. Motivated by these desiderata, we propose RAPTOR (Ridge-Adaptive Logistic Probe), a simple L2-regularized logistic probe whose validation-tuned ridge strength yields concept vectors from normalized weights. Across extensive experiments on instruction-tuned LLMs and human-written concept datasets, RAPTOR matches or exceeds strong baselines in accuracy while achieving competitive directional stability and substantially lower training cost; these quantitative results are supported by qualitative downstream steering demonstrations. Finally, using the Convex Gaussian Min-max Theorem (CGMT), we provide a mechanistic characterization of ridge logistic regression in an idealized Gaussian teacher-student model in the high-dimensional few-shot regime, explaining how penalty strength mediates probe accuracy and concept-vector stability and yielding structural predictions that qualitatively align with trends observed on real LLM embeddings.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2026.
Builds on
27 of 40 references.
References · 27
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
- 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
- 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
- 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,046
- 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,009
- 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 831
- 2023Steering Language Models With Activation Engineeringcited by 824
- 2019Plug and Play Language Models: A Simple Approach to Controlled Text Generationcited by 793
- 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 608
- 2020Null It Out: Guarding Protected Attributes by Iterative Nullspace Projectioncited by 442
- 2021DExperts: Decoding-Time Controlled Text Generation with Experts and Anti-Expertscited by 434
- 2020HateXplain: A Benchmark Dataset for Explainable Hate Speech Detectioncited by 403
15 more
- 2020GeDi: Generative Discriminator Guided Sequence Generationcited by 377
- 2020Information-Theoretic Probing with Minimum Description Lengthcited by 230
- 2020Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic Structurecited by 204
- 2017What do Neural Machine Translation Models Learn about Morphology?cited by 165
- 2024Improving Instruction-Following in Language Models through Activation Steeringcited by 149
- 2020Probing the Probing Paradigm: Does Probing Accuracy Entail Task Relevance?cited by 144
- 2024Analyzing the Generalization and Reliability of Steering Vectorscited by 130
- 2019A Model of Double Descent for High-dimensional Binary Linear Classificationcited by 81
- 2018A modern maximum-likelihood theory for high-dimensional logistic regressioncited by 79
- 2024Uncovering Safety Risks of Large Language Models through Concept Activation Vectorcited by 63
- 2019The Impact of Regularization on High-dimensional Logistic Regressioncited by 35
- 2019The generalization error of max-margin linear classifiers: Benign overfitting and high dimensional asymptotics in the overparametrized regimecited by 27
- 2025Controlling Large Language Models Through Concept Activation Vectorscited by 27
- 2024Beyond Single Concept Vector: Modeling Concept Subspace in LLMs with Gaussian Distributioncited by 24
- 2015Universality laws for randomized dimension reduction, with applicationscited by 21
Built on by
Not cited yet.