mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Psychological Concept Neurons: Can Neural Control Bias Probing and Shift Generation in LLMs?

arXiv 2604.11802 ↗First posted 13 Apr 2026cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Using psychological constructs such as the Big Five, large language models (LLMs) can imitate specific personality profiles and predict a user's personality. While LLMs can exhibit behaviors consistent with these constructs, it remains unclear where and how they are represented inside the model and how they relate to behavioral outputs. To address this gap, we focus on questionnaire-operationalized Big Five concepts, analyze the formation and localization of their internal representations, and use interventions to examine how these representations relate to behavioral outputs. In our experiment, we first use probing to examine where Big Five information emerges across model depth. We then identify neurons that respond selectively to each Big Five concept and test whether enhancing or suppressing their activations can bias latent representations and label generation in intended directions. We find that Big Five information becomes rapidly decodable in early layers and remains detectable through the final layers, while concept-selective neurons are most prevalent in mid layers and exhibit limited overlap across domains. Interventions on these neurons consistently shift probe readouts toward targeted concepts, with targeted success rates exceeding 0.8 for some concepts, indicating that the model's internal separation of Big Five personality traits can be causally steered. At the label-generation level, the same interventions often bias generated label distributions in the intended directions, but the effects are weaker, more concept-dependent, and often accompanied by cross-trait spillover, indicating that comparable control over generated labels is difficult even with interventions on a large fraction of concept-selective neurons. Overall, our findings reveal a gap between representational control and behavioral control in LLMs.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Apr 2026.

Builds on

14 of 18 references.

References · 14

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  2. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  3. 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,841
  4. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
  5. 2022Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samplescited by 737
  6. 2023Language Models Represent Space and Timecited by 306
  7. 2022Evaluating and Inducing Personality in Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 122
  8. 2024Personality Alignment of Large Language Modelscited by 36
  9. 2020Finding Experts in Transformer Modelscited by 28
  10. 2023Large Language Models Can Infer Psychological Dispositions of Social Media Userscited by 28
  11. 2024LLMs Simulate Big Five Personality Traits: Further Evidencecited by 21
  12. 2025Are LLMs effective psychological assessors? Leveraging adaptive RAG for interpretable mental health screening through psychometric practicecited by 10
2 more
  1. 2025Probing then Editing Response Personality of Large Language Modelscited by 9
  2. 2025Localizing Persona Representations in LLMscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.