mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Relational Rank Geometry in Transformers: Detecting and Steering Hidden-State Relation Frames

arXiv 2605.29634 ↗First posted 28 May 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Transformer hidden states are often interpreted through local or low-order objects: neurons, sparse features, attention heads, residual-stream directions, or activation patches. This paper studies a complementary object: the rank-indexed geometry of relations among token tuples. I use Plucker sign entropy to test whether r-argument relations leave arity-matched orientation signatures in hidden-state space. Across Llama-family 8B, 70B, and 405B checkpoints, true relation tuples show stronger orientation-sign consistency at the expected rank k=r for r=3,...,6 than scrambled tuples under matched random-control audits. Multi-template audits show that the effects survive surface variation, with all tested 405B rows retaining positive expected-rank margins and 8B/70B retaining positive rows with constructor-specific mixed cells. I then ask whether the same relation geometry can be steered. In an edge-grid clean/corrupt intervention assay over 32 prompts, the row/column scaffold and answer format stay fixed while the YES/NO relation map changes, and the corrupt hidden-state relation frame is patched toward clean or placebo targets. In 70B and 405B, clean-targeted relation-frame paths recover clean-answer behavior and residual relation geometry, while centroid-only and equal-norm controls show negligible recovery. Site/order controls further separate marker-site importance from ordered clean-frame geometry: target clean shape and cross-prompt clean shape recover behavior and residual geometry at the marker interface, whereas corrupt-donor transfer, same-site permutation/reflection, wrong-site clean deltas, centroid-only motion, and equal-norm noise fail or remain far below clean-frame paths. The result is a controlled bridge from relation probing to relation-frame intervention: relation rank geometry can be detected, targeted, and behaviorally validated in transformer hidden states.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 May 2026.

Builds on

20 of 27 references.

References · 20

  1. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
  2. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,359
  3. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,130
  4. 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 700
  5. 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 679
  6. 2021Causal Abstractions of Neural Networkscited by 401
  7. 2023Attribution Patching Outperforms Automated Circuit Discoverycited by 196
  8. 2023Linearity of Relation Decoding in Transformer Language Modelscited by 190
  9. 2020Networks beyond pairwise interactions: structure and dynamicscited by 127
  10. 2023How do Language Models Bind Entities in Context?cited by 102
  11. 2018Simplicial Closure and higher-order link predictioncited by 92
  12. 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Capture Concept Manifolds?cited by 25
8 more
  1. 2024A polar coordinate system represents syntax in large language modelscited by 24
  2. 2026Manifold Steering Reveals the Shared Geometry of Neural Network Representation and Behaviorcited by 22
  3. 2026The Shape of Beliefs: Geometry, Dynamics, and Interventions along Representation Manifolds of Language Models' Posteriorscited by 15
  4. 2026Interpretability without actionability: mechanistic methods cannot correct language model errors despite near-perfect internal representationscited by 13
  5. 2026Arithmetic in the Wild: Llama uses Base-10 Addition to Reason About Cyclic Conceptscited by 9
  6. 2025Hypothesis-Driven Feature Manifold Analysis in LLMs via Supervised Multi-Dimensional Scalingcited by 6
  7. 2026Cell-Based Representation of Relational Binding in Language Modelscited by 5
  8. 2026Evaluating Relational Reasoning in LLMs with RELcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.