mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

All Circuits Lead to Rome: Rethinking Functional Anisotropy in Circuit and Sheaf Discovery for LLMs

arXiv 2605.12671 ↗First posted 12 May 2026cs.CLcited by 9

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

In this paper, we present empirical and theoretical evidence against a central but largely implicit assumption in circuit and sheaf discovery (CSD), which we term the Functional Anisotropy Hypothesis: the idea that functions in large language models (LLMs) are localised to a unique or near-unique internal mechanism. We show that a single LLM task can instead be supported by multiple, structurally distinct circuits or sheaves that are simultaneously faithful, sparse, and complete. To systematically uncover such competing mechanisms, we introduce Overlap-Aware Sheaf Repulsion, a method that augments the CSD objective with an explicit penalty on structural overlap across multiple discovery runs, enabling the discovery of circuits or sheaves with strong task performance but minimal shared structure across a plethora of common CSD benchmarks. We find that this phenomenon becomes increasingly pronounced as the number of discovered sheaves grows and persists robustly across major CSD methods. We further identify an ultra-sparse three-edge sheaf and show that none of its edges is individually indispensable, undermining even weakened notions of canonical or essential components. To explain these findings, we propose a Distributive Dense Circuit Hypothesis and provide a theoretical analysis demonstrating that non-unique, low-overlap circuit explanations arise naturally from high-dimensional superposition under mild assumptions. Together, our results suggest that mechanistic explanations in LLMs are inherently non-canonical and call for a rethinking of how CSD results should be interpreted and evaluated.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 51 of its 66 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2026.

Builds on

51 of 66 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2022PINTO: Faithful Language Reasoning Using Prompt-Generated Rationales3 Nov

Other references · 50

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  3. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  4. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
  5. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
  6. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  7. 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
  8. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
  9. 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,109
  10. 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,059
  11. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 971
  12. 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
38 more
  1. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
  2. 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 876
  3. 2020A Primer in BERTology: What we know about how BERT workscited by 815
  4. 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
  5. 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 640
  6. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
  7. 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
  8. 2022Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Build Predictions by Promoting Concepts in the Vocabulary Spacecited by 532
  9. 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 457
  10. 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 389
  11. 2023Explainability for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 333
  12. 2016Rationalizing Neural Predictionscited by 281
  13. 2018Techniques for Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 238
  14. 2016Fine-grained Analysis of Sentence Embeddings Using Auxiliary Prediction Taskscited by 216
  15. 2023Attribution Patching Outperforms Automated Circuit Discoverycited by 209
  16. 2020Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic Structurecited by 207
  17. 2015Visualizing and Understanding Neural Models in NLPcited by 200
  18. 2025Open Problems in Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 179
  19. 2023The Hydra Effect: Emergent Self-repair in Language Model Computationscited by 156
  20. 2024Have Faith in Faithfulness: Going Beyond Circuit Overlap When Finding Model Mechanismscited by 149
  21. 2023Tracr: Compiled Transformers as a Laboratory for Interpretabilitycited by 104
  22. 2024Finding Transformer Circuits with Edge Pruningcited by 60
  23. 2025MIB: A Mechanistic Interpretability Benchmarkcited by 56
  24. 2013Estimating or Propagating Gradients Through Stochastic Neuronscited by 55
  25. 2024What does the Knowledge Neuron Thesis Have to do with Knowledge?cited by 49
  26. 2025Massive Values in Self-Attention Modules are the Key to Contextual Knowledge Understandingcited by 47
  27. 2020Why Attentions May Not Be Interpretable?cited by 41
  28. 2022Going Beyond XAI: A Systematic Survey for Explanation-Guided Learningcited by 36
  29. 2025Mechanistic understanding and validation of large AI models with SemanticLenscited by 29
  30. 2025SAE-SSV: Supervised Steering in Sparse Representation Spaces for Reliable Control of Language Modelscited by 29
  31. 2024InterpBench: Semi-Synthetic Transformers for Evaluating Mechanistic Interpretability Techniquescited by 25
  32. 2025EAP-GP: Mitigating Saturation Effect in Gradient-based Automated Circuit Identificationcited by 21
  33. 2024Sheaf Discovery with Joint Computation Graph Pruning and Flexible Granularitycited by 14
  34. 2025Interpretation Meets Safety: A Survey on Interpretation Methods and Tools for Improving LLM Safetycited by 10
  35. 2025SAGE: An Agentic Explainer Framework for Interpreting SAE Features in Language Modelscited by 10
  36. 2025Hypothesis-Driven Feature Manifold Analysis in LLMs via Supervised Multi-Dimensional Scalingcited by 8
  37. 2025Llama See, Llama Do: A Mechanistic Perspective on Contextual Entrainment and Distraction in LLMscited by 6
  38. 2026Farther the Shift, Sparser the Representation: Analyzing OOD Mechanisms in LLMscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.

9 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Data-driven Circuit Discovery for Interpretability of Language Models
  2. 2026Where Animacy Lives in Large Language Models: Tracing the Circuits of the Animacy Concept
  3. 2025Position-aware Automatic Circuit Discovery
  4. 2024Circuit Compositions: Exploring Modular Structures in Transformer-Based Language Models
  5. 2025Anatomy of an Idiom: Tracing Non-Compositionality in Language Models
  6. 2025Rethinking Circuit Completeness in Language Models: AND, OR, and ADDER Gates
  7. 2026Slaying the Hydra: Interaction-Aware Circuit Discovery in Language Models
  8. 2025HOLOGRAPH: Active Causal Discovery via Sheaf-Theoretic Alignment of Large Language Model Priors