mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How LLMs Follow Instructions: Skillful Coordination, Not a Universal Mechanism

arXiv 2604.06015 ↗First posted 7 Apr 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Instruction tuning is commonly assumed to endow language models with a domain-general ability to follow instructions, yet the underlying mechanism remains poorly understood. Does instruction-following rely on a universal mechanism or compositional skill deployment? We investigate this through diagnostic probing across nine diverse tasks in three instruction-tuned models. Our analysis provides converging evidence against a universal mechanism. First, general probes trained across all tasks show selective rather than uniform deficits relative to task-specific specialists, indicating that representational sharing is partial and structured rather than global. Second, cross-task transfer is weak and clustered by skill similarity. Third, causal ablation reveals sparse asymmetric dependencies rather than shared representations. Tasks also stratify by complexity across layers, with structural constraints emerging early and semantic tasks emerging late. Finally, temporal analysis shows that the constraint signal becomes decodable only once generation is under way, and remains so throughout the response. These findings indicate that instruction-following is better characterized as skillful coordination of diverse linguistic capabilities rather than deployment of a single abstract constraint-checking process.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2026.

Builds on

17 of 31 references.

References · 17

  1. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  2. 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,928
  3. 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,783
  4. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
  5. 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,259
  6. 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,046
  7. 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 831
  8. 2020Intrinsic Dimensionality Explains the Effectiveness of Language Model Fine-Tuningcited by 658
  9. 2020Null It Out: Guarding Protected Attributes by Iterative Nullspace Projectioncited by 442
  10. 2019Nuanced Metrics for Measuring Unintended Bias with Real Data for Text Classificationcited by 396
  11. 2018Insights on representational similarity in neural networks with canonical correlationcited by 318
  12. 2024Improving Instruction-Following in Language Models through Activation Steeringcited by 149
5 more
  1. 2023CoEdIT: Text Editing by Task-Specific Instruction Tuningcited by 67
  2. 2023From Language Modeling to Instruction Following: Understanding the Behavior Shift in LLMs after Instruction Tuningcited by 56
  3. 2025SAIF: A Sparse Autoencoder Framework for Interpreting and Steering Instruction Following of Language Modelscited by 32
  4. 2024SysBench: Can Large Language Models Follow System Messages?cited by 26
  5. 2024Do LLMs "know" internally when they follow instructions?cited by 25

Built on by

Not cited yet.