Gathered, Not Admitted: How Attention Brings a Latent Variable into Verbalizable Form
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Language models hold latent quantities in a form they can report on, and more of a quantity is present in that form when the task requires reusing it flexibly. What causes a representation to enter that form is open, and the word workspace invites an admission story: a gate that decides what gets in. Testing it on open-weight models with Jacobian lenses, over a benchmark whose five arms share an identical context, we find no gate where it predicts one. Demand raises a concept's lens visibility beyond what applying an operator to a supplied value produces: +0.050 [+0.045, +0.057] in percentile rank on our primary checkpoint, positive on all four we measure, though that arm answers at ceiling and the accuracymatched contrast is stronger under that readout. At the same time one shared linear map decodes the variable from every arm, the control included, at 6.4-9.0x its selection-corrected floor. What produces the later readable form at the queried position is attention-mediated gathering inside a mid-depth window: separating patch depth from readout depth puts transport there at least 17x above anywhere shallower under non-saturating readouts, with no tested MLP output contributing positively inside it. Under the saturating percentile rank the same grid does not localise the window, which is a fact about that measure. An arm that needs the variable for nothing concentrates sevenfold less, so the window is demand-specific. That window has two measured edges, a survival failure below and destruction above, and it falls at the same fractional depth in a 64-layer hybrid and a 62-layer dense model from another family. We localise where the variable is installed and read, not the route from the passage, which transports nothing. But the readout is not a calibrated measure of use: three components move it to within 12% of one another and differ 7.4x in what they do to the answer.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Aug 2026.
Builds on
22 of 24 references.
References · 22
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2022No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translationcited by 1,312
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
- 2023Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lenscited by 623
- 2023Dissecting Recall of Factual Associations in Auto-Regressive Language Modelscited by 528
- 2023Towards Best Practices of Activation Patching in Language Models: Metrics and Methodscited by 359
- 2023Function Vectors in Large Language Modelscited by 308
- 2024Do Llamas Work in English? On the Latent Language of Multilingual Transformerscited by 281
- 2023Localizing Model Behavior with Path Patchingcited by 195
- 2023Is This the Subspace You Are Looking for? An Interpretability Illusion for Subspace Activation Patchingcited by 80
- 2026Verbalizable Representations Form a Global Workspace in Language Modelscited by 75
- 2024Separating Tongue from Thought: Activation Patching Reveals Language-Agnostic Concept Representations in Transformerscited by 44
10 more
- 2025Causal Head Gating: A Framework for Interpreting Roles of Attention Heads in Transformerscited by 16
- 2026Prompt-Activation Duality: Improving Activation Steering via Attention-Level Interventionscited by 6
- 2026Endogenous Resistance to Activation Steering in Language Modelscited by 5
- 2026Where Computation Lives Inside TabPFN: Causal Localisation of Attention Head Functioncited by 4
- 2026How Alignment Routes: Localizing, Scaling, and Controlling Policy Circuits in Language Modelscited by 3
- 2026Silent Alarm: A J-Space Protocol for Comparing Danger Recognition Across Models and Quantization Levelscited by 2
- 2026J-CoT: Chain-of-Thought in J-Spacecited by 2
- 2025Learning to Chain Operations by Routing Information Through a Global Workspacecited by 1
- 2026When Activation Oracles Learn Not to Read: Concept-Specific Blind Spots in Fine-Tuned Oraclescited by 1
- 2026A Theory of Conditional Collapse under Low-Rank Weight-Space Ablations: I. The Single-Block Theory and Synthetic Validationcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.