mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Probabilistic Attribution For Large Language Models

arXiv 2605.21726 ↗First posted 20 May 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The generative nature of Large Language Models (LLMs) is reflected in the conditional probabilities they compute to sample each response token given the previous tokens. These probabilities encode the distributional structure that the model learns in training and exploits in inference. In this work, we use these probabilities to situate LLMs within the mathematical theory of stochastic processes. We use this framework to design a model-agnostic probabilistic token attribution measure, using Bayes rule to invert the next-token log-probabilities so as to capture the models internal representation of the distribution over token sequences. The representation is independent of the models computational structure. This representation yields the conditional probability of the response given the prompt, and of the response given the prompt with a token marginalized away. Our attribution score is the log of the ratio of these probabilities. We further compute the entropies of a single prompts token distributions, conditioned on the remaining context. The interplay between entropy and attribution score sheds light on LLM behavior. We evaluate 8 models across 7 prompts and investigate anomalies, token sensitivity, response stability, model stability, and training convergence, thereby improving interpretability and guiding users to focus on uncertain or unstable parts of the generation.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 May 2026.

Builds on

23 of 35 references.

References · 23

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  3. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  4. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
  5. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  6. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
  7. 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
  8. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  9. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  10. 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,729
  11. 2019Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AIcited by 1,552
  12. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
11 more
  1. 2016The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse contextcited by 992
  2. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
  3. 2020A Primer in BERTology: What we know about how BERT workscited by 815
  4. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 636
  5. 2020Captum: A unified and generic model interpretability library for PyTorchcited by 547
  6. 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 530
  7. 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 310
  8. 2023Inseq: An Interpretability Toolkit for Sequence Generation Modelscited by 78
  9. 2024From Understanding to Utilization: A Survey on Explainability for Large Language Modelscited by 48
  10. 2021Perturbing Inputs for Fragile Interpretations in Deep Natural Language Processingcited by 30
  11. 2024Normalized AOPC: Fixing Misleading Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Attribution Explainabilitycited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.