# Counterfactual Likelihood Tests for Indirect Influence in Private Reasoning Channels

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.19092 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.19092/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 11 of its 11 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.05262/) (2022)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13702/) (2023)
- [AI safety via debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.00899/) (2018)
- [Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.11473/) (2025)
- [Causal Mediation Analysis for Interpreting Neural NLP: The Case of Gender Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.12265/) (2020)
- [Multi-Stream LLMs: Unblocking Language Models with Parallel Streams of Thoughts, Inputs and Outputs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.12460/) (2026)

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

- [Stage-Replay Divergence Follows the KV Cache: Fixed-Prefix Precision Controls and Bidirectional Cache Transplantation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.28495/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Reasoning systems increasingly separate intermediate computation into private and public channels, creating evaluation cases that look similar in transcripts: independent co-derivation, direct access to private content, and indirect influence through public communication. This paper presents a counterfactual likelihood test for measuring influence between private reasoning channels. The method replaces an upstream private block with a length-matched donor block, holds the public token sequence and downstream target fixed, and measures the downstream target's negative-log-likelihood shift. On a 7B role-channel reasoning model used for validation, textual probes are unreliable: raw n-gram overlap overstates leakage, corrected overlap remains noisy, and canary reproduction reports no discrimination. Counterfactual likelihood separates unmasked and masked conditions, while length matching controls a RoPE positional confound. In the hardened masked validation, reverse B-to-A influence is near zero, while A-to-B influence persists through public-speech hidden states. A multi-checkpoint validation across three checkpoints, five seeds, and 13,734 valid directional contrasts replicates this asymmetry. A graph-separation control that blocks private-to-public carrier edges produces bit-identical natural and counterfactual scores across all 13,734 control evaluations, identifying the tested public-channel pathway as the complete carrier of the measured counterfactual signal under the implemented role-visibility mask. The results show that private-channel evaluation should report direct and indirect influence separately, and that counterfactual likelihood probes provide a practical default for measuring these boundaries.