Tracing Computation Density in LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Transformer-based large language models (LLMs) are comprised of billions of parameters arranged in deep and wide computational graphs, but it is not clear that they exploit their full capacity for all inputs. We introduce the s-Trace method to efficiently estimate a subgraph of size s that approximates a full model output. With this method, we find the computation in a variety of LLMs to be organized in two distinct phases. A small subgraph mostly composed of early-layer nodes can reconstruct the head of the full model output distribution. Adding further nodes, mostly located in later layers and increasingly consisting of attention heads, leads to incremental refinements in approximating the full output distribution. We find moreover that the amount of necessary computation per input correlates with model uncertainty, and that sparser subgraphs encode shallow statistics, such as unigram frequency. Overall, our results suggest a consistent modular organization in effective LLM computation, with a sparse early-layer core providing a rough prediction that is further refined through denser computations in later layers.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2026.
Builds on
23 of 49 references.
References · 23
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2016Pointer Sentinel Mixture Modelscited by 3,096
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
- 2019Are Sixteen Heads Really Better than One?cited by 816
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
- 2023Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lenscited by 623
- 2022Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Build Predictions by Promoting Concepts in the Vocabulary Spacecited by 532
- 2024How to use and interpret activation patchingcited by 214
- 2023Attribution Patching Outperforms Automated Circuit Discoverycited by 209
11 more
- 2021MoEfication: Transformer Feed-forward Layers are Mixtures of Expertscited by 152
- 2024The Remarkable Robustness of LLMs: Stages of Inference?cited by 146
- 2025How Well do LLMs Compress Their Own Chain-of-Thought? A Token Complexity Approachcited by 97
- 2024Not All Layers of LLMs Are Necessary During Inferencecited by 96
- 2024Information Flow Routes: Automatically Interpreting Language Models at Scalecited by 95
- 2017Residual Connections Encourage Iterative Inferencecited by 77
- 2024Finding Transformer Circuits with Edge Pruningcited by 60
- 2025Do Language Models Use Their Depth Efficiently?cited by 50
- 2022Neurocompositional computing: From the Central Paradox of Cognition to a new generation of AI systemscited by 44
- 2025Everything, Everywhere, All at Once: Is Mechanistic Interpretability Identifiable?cited by 34
- 2025LLMs as a synthesis between symbolic and distributed approaches to languagecited by 13
Built on by
Not cited yet.