# Patch-Effect Graph Kernels for LLM Interpretability

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06480 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.06480/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Circuits and mechanistic analysis, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability.
- Builds on 7 of its 16 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 May 2026.

## Placed in

- Mechanistic interpretability / [Circuits and mechanistic analysis](https://mlsanity.com/mechinterp/circuits-and-mechanistic-analysis/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.01108/) (2019)
- [Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 small](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.00593/) (2022)
- [Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14997/) (2023)
- [How does GPT-2 compute greater-than?: Interpreting mathematical abilities in a pre-trained language model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.00586/) (2023)
- [Localizing Model Behavior with Path Patching](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05969/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Graph Kernels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.11835/) (2019)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [How Do Language Models Choose Between Context and Memory?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.00753/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Mechanistic interpretability aims to reverse-engineer transformer computations by identifying causal circuits through activation patching. However, scaling these interventions across diverse prompts and task families produces high-dimensional, unstructured datasets that are difficult to compare systematically. We propose a framework that reframes mechanistic analysis as a graph machine-learning problem by representing activation-patching profiles as patch-effect graphs over model components. We introduce three graph-construction methods: direct-influence via causal mediation, partial-correlation, and co-influence and apply graph kernels to analyze the resulting structures. Evaluating this approach on GPT-2 Small using Indirect Object Identification (IOI) and related tasks, we find that patch-effect graphs preserve discriminative structural signals. Specifically, localized edge-slot features provide higher classification accuracy than global graph-shape descriptors. A screened paired-patching validation suggests that CI and PC selected candidate edges correspond to stronger activation-influence effects than random or low-rank candidates. Crucially, by evaluating these representations against rigorous prompt-only and raw patch-effect controls, we make the evidential scope of the benchmark explicit: graph features compress structured patching signal, while raw tensors and surface cues define strong baselines that any circuit-level claim should address. Ultimately, our framework provides a compression and evaluation pipeline for comparing patching-derived structures under controlled baselines, separating robust slice-discriminative evidence from stronger task-general causal-circuit claims.