Towards Verifiable Transformers: Solver-Checkable Circuit Explanations
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Circuits and mechanistic analysis
Abstract (arXiv)
Mechanistic interpretability typically discovers circuits and then argues what they do from examples and ablations. We introduce Verifiable Transformers, a framework for turning task-localized circuits into bounded, solver-checkable claims: projected functional equivalence, task-relevant invariance, edge necessity, and robustness to continuous final-residual perturbations. At small scale, we directly verify all four properties for quote-closing and bracket-type circuits, including program-mediated circuits whose attention selection is entirely symbolic. At GPT-2 scale, we remove LayerNorm from a sparsemax/LeakyReLU model after training with a +0.0087 OpenWebText loss increase, replace retained attention heads with synthesized restricted-DSL programs, and calibrate only program-local readouts while freezing and hashing every other parameter. The resulting three-edge quote circuit (embedding → MLP 0 → program head → logits) verifies all four properties over a hash-pinned 1,280-prompt domain in linear real arithmetic: 1,280/1,280 equivalence and invariance, 640 edge-necessity witnesses per edge, and robustness at ε = 0.01 with minimum certified radius 0.01515. For two alphabet variants of the same opener-detection/copy-type task, untouched gates expose a localization frontier: bracket-type extraction is exact only with all 144 heads, while the constructed quote artifact verifies with three edges. Naive discovery-based verification failed for measured reasons; at scale, we find we must build the object we can verify. The verified object is a calibrated artifact, not the unmodified model, and all claims are bounded to declared domains.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Circuits and mechanistic analysis, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 15 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2026.
Builds on
15 of 46 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Weight-sparse transformers have interpretable circuits17 Nov
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretability28 Apr
- 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretability12 Jan
Other references · 12
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,669
- 2019Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learning for NLPcited by 4,236
- 2016Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)cited by 3,502
- 2016Pointer Sentinel Mixture Modelscited by 3,096
- 2017Deep Setscited by 1,421
- 2017Reluplex: An Efficient SMT Solver for Verifying Deep Neural Networkscited by 744
- 2016From Softmax to Sparsemax: A Sparse Model of Attention and Multi-Label Classificationcited by 341
- 2019Adaptively Sparse Transformerscited by 155
- 2021Self-Attention Networks Can Process Bounded Hierarchical Languagescited by 105
- 2020RNNs can generate bounded hierarchical languages with optimal memorycited by 59
- 2025Transformers Don't Need LayerNorm at Inference Time: Scaling LayerNorm Removal to GPT-2 XL and the Implications for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Transformers are Inherently Succinct
- 2026Circuit Claims Depend on What Is Extracted and How It Is Compared
- 2026Can Language Model Agents be Helpful Circuit Explainers in Mechanistic Interpretability?
- 2026Formal Mechanistic Interpretability: Automated Circuit Discovery with Provable Guarantees
- 2022Transformers Learn Shortcuts to Automata
- 2026Revisiting Padded Transformer Expressivity: Which Architectural Choices Matter and Which Don't
- 2025Self-Verifying Reflection Helps Transformers with CoT Reasoning
- 2026CircuitProbe: Predicting Reasoning Circuits in Transformers via Stability Zone Detection