mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Operationalising the Superficial Alignment Hypothesis via Task Complexity

arXiv 2602.15829 ↗First posted 17 Feb 2026cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The superficial alignment hypothesis (SAH) posits that large language models learn most of their knowledge during pre-training, and that post-training merely surfaces this knowledge. The SAH, however, lacks a precise definition, which has led to (i) different and seemingly orthogonal arguments supporting it, and (ii) important critiques to it. We propose a new metric called task complexity: the length of the shortest program that achieves a target performance on a task. In this framework, the SAH simply claims that pre-trained models drastically reduce the complexity of achieving high performance on many tasks. Our definition unifies prior arguments supporting the SAH, interpreting them as different strategies to find such short programs. Experimentally, we estimate the task complexity of mathematical reasoning, machine translation, and instruction following; we then show that these complexities can be remarkably low when conditioned on a pre-trained model. Further, we find that pre-training enables access to strong performances on our tasks, but it can require programs of gigabytes of length to access them. Post-training, on the other hand, collapses the complexity of reaching this same performance by several orders of magnitude. Overall, our results highlight that task adaptation often requires surprisingly little information -- often just a few kilobytes.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Feb 2026.

Builds on

42 of 58 references.

References · 42

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  3. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
  4. 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,878
  5. 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,355
  6. 2025s1: Simple test-time scalingcited by 1,311
  7. 2022No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translationcited by 1,290
  8. 2021BitFit: Simple Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning for Transformer-based Masked Language-modelscited by 1,234
  9. 2023Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 1,143
  10. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,106
  11. 2024Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Trainingcited by 988
  12. 2022Few-Shot Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning is Better and Cheaper than In-Context Learningcited by 886
30 more
  1. 2024Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Large Models: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 641
  2. 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 608
  3. 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 530
  4. 2023The Unlocking Spell on Base LLMs: Rethinking Alignment via In-Context Learningcited by 251
  5. 2020Information-Theoretic Probing with Minimum Description Lengthcited by 230
  6. 2023Language Modeling Is Compressioncited by 225
  7. 2020Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic Structurecited by 204
  8. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Featurescited by 86
  9. 2025Reasoning with Sampling: Your Base Model is Smarter Than You Thinkcited by 84
  10. 2020Pareto Probing: Trading Off Accuracy for Complexitycited by 55
  11. 2025Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 53
  12. 2025How much do language models memorize?cited by 53
  13. 2025Understanding (Un)Reliability of Steering Vectors in Language Modelscited by 39
  14. 2024BitDelta: Your Fine-Tune May Only Be Worth One Bitcited by 38
  15. 2025Model Tampering Attacks Enable More Rigorous Evaluations of LLM Capabilitiescited by 36
  16. 2025The Non-Linear Representation Dilemma: Is Causal Abstraction Enough for Mechanistic Interpretability?cited by 34
  17. 2024From Distributional to Overton Pluralism: Investigating Large Language Model Alignmentcited by 33
  18. 2025Language Models are Injective and Hence Invertiblecited by 31
  19. 2021A Bayesian Framework for Information-Theoretic Probingcited by 22
  20. 2024Controllable Context Sensitivity and the Knob Behind Itcited by 22
  21. 2023ComPEFT: Compression for Communicating Parameter Efficient Updates via Sparsification and Quantizationcited by 18
  22. 2024Delta-CoMe: Training-Free Delta-Compression with Mixed-Precision for Large Language Modelscited by 17
  23. 2025Estimating Worst-Case Frontier Risks of Open-Weight LLMscited by 17
  24. 2023Measuring and Modifying Factual Knowledge in Large Language Modelscited by 16
  25. 2024Superficial Safety Alignment Hypothesiscited by 14
  26. 2026Learning to Reason in 13 Parameterscited by 13
  27. 2024Revisiting the Superficial Alignment Hypothesiscited by 12
  28. 2024Instruction Following without Instruction Tuningcited by 11
  29. 2025Extracting and Understanding the Superficial Knowledge in Alignmentcited by 5
  30. 2025Dynamic Base model Shift for Delta Compressioncited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023A Preliminary Study of the Intrinsic Relationship between Complexity and Alignment
  2. 2026What do Language Models Learn and When? The Implicit Curriculum Hypothesis
  3. 2025The Illusion of Diminishing Returns: Measuring Long Horizon Execution in LLMs
  4. 2025Inference-Time Scaling for Complex Tasks: Where We Stand and What Lies Ahead
  5. 2025A Theory of Inference Compute Scaling: Reasoning through Directed Stochastic Skill Search
  6. 2024Observational Scaling Laws and the Predictability of Language Model Performance
  7. 2026Prescriptive Scaling Reveals the Evolution of Language Model Capabilities
  8. 2025How Instruction and Reasoning Data shape Post-Training: Data Quality through the Lens of Layer-wise Gradients