Single-Position Intervention Fails: Distributed Output Templates Drive In-Context Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding how large language models encode task identity from few-shot demonstrations is a central open problem in mechanistic interpretability. Prior work uses linear probing to localize task representations, reporting high classification accuracy at specific layers. We reveal a striking dissociation: probing accuracy completely fails to predict causal importance. Single-position activation intervention achieves 0% task transfer across all 28 layers of Llama-3.2-3B-despite 100% probing accuracy at those same positions. This null result is itself a key finding, demonstrating that task encoding is fundamentally distributed. Multi-position intervention-replacing activations at all demonstration output tokens simultaneously-achieves up to 96% transfer (N=50, 95% CI: [87%, 99%]) at layer 8, pinpointing for the first time the causal locus of ICL task identity. We establish the generality of these findings across four models spanning three architecture families (LLaMA, Qwen, Gemma), discovering a universal intervention window at ~30% network depth. Causal tracing uncovers an asymmetric architecture: the query position is strictly necessary (53-100% disruption) while no individual demonstration position is necessary (0% disruption)-resolving a key ambiguity in prior accounts. Crucially, transfer depends on internal representation compatibility, not surface similarity (r=-0.05 vs r=0.31), ruling out trivial explanations. These results establish the distributed template hypothesis: ICL task identity is encoded as output format templates distributed across demonstration tokens, fundamentally reshaping our understanding of how in-context learning operates.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Apr 2026.
Builds on
18 of 25 references.
References · 18
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,273
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
- 2022Emergent Abilities of Large Language Modelscited by 2,483
- 2022Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?cited by 1,413
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,371
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,130
- 2021Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivitycited by 1,122
- 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 928
- 2022Transformers learn in-context by gradient descentcited by 714
- 2022What Can Transformers Learn In-Context? A Case Study of Simple Function Classescited by 700
6 more
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 700
- 2022What learning algorithm is in-context learning? Investigations with linear modelscited by 671
- 2020Null It Out: Guarding Protected Attributes by Iterative Nullspace Projectioncited by 442
- 2023In-Context Learning Creates Task Vectorscited by 302
- 2023Function Vectors in Large Language Modelscited by 292
- 2018Analysis Methods in Neural Language Processing: A Surveycited by 276
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.