From Simulation to Enaction: Post-trained language models recognize and react to their own generations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Language models are pretrained as passive predictors with no incentive to model the consequences of their own outputs. Post-training changes this: a model producing its own responses can benefit from recognizing that it is on-policy. We present evidence that post-trained models recognize their on-policy generations, and this recognition is implicitly encoded in their output distributions. In particular, on-policy output distribution entropy is 3--4× lower than off-policy entropy, across model families and size classes. We trace part of this effect to an internal representation of input surprise, tracking the unlikeliness of the most recent input token according to the model's prior predictions, that causally modulates output entropy. One example of these phenomena can be observed in response to open-ended prompts; post-trained models (unlike pretrained models) collapse their uncertainty over the topic of their upcoming response before the first output token; violating this cached intention with a different-topic prefill results in higher output entropy. We also tested whether models can distinguish on-policy contexts from prefills via explicit verbal report. We find that they can, but that interestingly, this explicit recognition routes through a different mechanism than implicit recognition.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 May 2026.
Builds on
15 of 18 references.
References · 15
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 686
- 2025The Entropy Mechanism of Reinforcement Learning for Reasoning Language Modelscited by 485
- 2023Understanding the Effects of RLHF on LLM Generalisation and Diversitycited by 396
- 2023Role-Play with Large Language Modelscited by 294
- 2022Talking About Large Language Modelscited by 175
- 2023Taken out of context: On measuring situational awareness in LLMscited by 143
- 2023Future Lens: Anticipating Subsequent Tokens from a Single Hidden Statecited by 121
- 2024Looking Inward: Language Models Can Learn About Themselves by Introspectioncited by 113
- 2025Tell me about yourself: LLMs are aware of their learned behaviorscited by 91
- 2026Emergent Introspective Awareness in Large Language Modelscited by 82
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.
6 papers.
- 2026Verbalizable Representations Form a Global Workspace in Language Modelscited by 75
- 2026Measuring the Assistant's Harmlessness Preferences on the User Turncited by 1
- 2026LLMs Trust Their Own: Identity-Dependent Conformity in Multi-Agent Systemscited by 1
- 2026The Assistant as a Privileged Persona: A canonical reference in cross-persona self-recognitioncited by 0
- 2026Where Is the "Self" of a Large Language Model? -- From Self-Index to Self-Referencecited by 0
- 2026SFT Leaves a Reproducible Signature in Activation Geometry: Calibrating Post-Training Interpretability Against Run-to-Run Noisecited by 0
- 2026SFT Leaves a Reproducible Signature in Activation Geometry: Calibrating Post-Training Interpretability Against Run-to-Run Noise12 Oct 2026
- 2026Where Is the "Self" of a Large Language Model? -- From Self-Index to Self-Reference12 Oct 2026
- 2026LLMs Trust Their Own: Identity-Dependent Conformity in Multi-Agent Systems27 Sep 2026
- 2026Measuring the Assistant's Harmlessness Preferences on the User Turn20 Sep 2026
- 2026Verbalizable Representations Form a Global Workspace in Language Models16 Jul 2026
- 2026The Assistant as a Privileged Persona: A canonical reference in cross-persona self-recognition30 May 2026