Instructions Shape Production of Language, not Processing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Instructions trigger a production-centered mechanism in language models. Through a cognitively inspired lens that separates language processing and production, we reveal this mechanism as an asymmetry between the two stages by probing task-specific information layer-wise across five binary judgment tasks. Specifically, we measure how instruction tokens shape information both when sample tokens, the input under evaluation, are processed and when output tokens are produced. Across prompting variations, task-specific information in sample tokens remains largely stable and correlates only weakly with behavior, whereas the same information in output tokens varies substantially and correlates strongly with behavior. Attention-based interventions confirm this pattern causally: blocking instruction flow to all subsequent tokens reduces both behavior and information in output tokens, whereas blocking it only to sample tokens has minimal effect on either. The asymmetry generalizes across model families and tasks, and becomes sharper with model scale and instruction-tuning, both of which disproportionately affect the production stage. Our findings suggest that understanding model capabilities requires jointly assessing internals and behavior, while decomposing the internal perspective by token position to distinguish the processing of input tokens from the production of output tokens.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 48 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.
Builds on
48 of 67 references.
References · 48
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
- 2022Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?cited by 1,434
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,392
- 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,353
- 2021Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivitycited by 1,135
- 2023LIMA: Less Is More for Alignmentcited by 1,100
- 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,059
36 more
- 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
- 2020StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language modelscited by 924
- 2025Large Language Diffusion Modelscited by 912
- 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 876
- 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 817
- 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 767
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 659
- 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 640
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
- 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 457
- 2019What do you learn from context? Probing for sentence structure in contextualized word representationscited by 438
- 2021Do Prompt-Based Models Really Understand the Meaning of their Prompts?cited by 326
- 2023In-Context Learning Creates Task Vectorscited by 312
- 2023State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluationcited by 310
- 2023Function Vectors in Large Language Modelscited by 308
- 2021Surface Form Competition: Why the Highest Probability Answer Isn't Always Rightcited by 263
- 2020Neurosymbolic AI: The 3rd Wavecited by 255
- 2024LLMs Know More Than They Show: On the Intrinsic Representation of LLM Hallucinationscited by 244
- 2020Information-Theoretic Probing with Minimum Description Lengthcited by 232
- 2019oLMpics -- On what Language Model Pre-training Capturescited by 161
- 2024ProSA: Assessing and Understanding the Prompt Sensitivity of LLMscited by 149
- 2023The Curious Case of Hallucinatory (Un)answerability: Finding Truths in the Hidden States of Over-Confident Large Language Modelscited by 55
- 2024Elements of World Knowledge (EWoK): A Cognition-Inspired Framework for Evaluating Basic World Knowledge in Language Modelscited by 55
- 2024Auxiliary task demands mask the capabilities of smaller language modelscited by 54
- 2025Measuring Chain of Thought Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning Stepscited by 47
- 2024Monitoring Latent World States in Language Models with Propositional Probescited by 43
- 2024Estimating Knowledge in Large Language Models Without Generating a Single Tokencited by 40
- 2021Discourse Probing of Pretrained Language Modelscited by 38
- 2024Holmes: A Benchmark to Assess the Linguistic Competence of Language Modelscited by 26
- 2024Do LLMs "know" internally when they follow instructions?cited by 26
- 2025DOVE: A Large-Scale Multi-Dimensional Predictions Dataset Towards Meaningful LLM Evaluationcited by 21
- 2024Predictions from language models for multiple-choice tasks are not robust under variation of scoring methodscited by 13
- 2025The Mighty ToRR: A Benchmark for Table Reasoning and Robustnesscited by 10
- 2026Language Models Struggle to Use Representations Learned In-Contextcited by 6
- 2025Aligned Probing: Relating Toxic Behavior and Model Internalscited by 5
- 2026Robustness as an Emergent Property of Task Performancecited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.