mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Map Users and Mapmakers: The Scope of Cognitive Attribution from Acquired Representations

arXiv 2609.13879 ↗First posted 12 Sep 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

An acquired representation can enlarge a system's cognitive repertoire without transferring the capacities exercised in producing that representation. This paper develops a framework for specifying that enlargement and its limits. Its central contribution is a five-part attribution table distinguishing effective tracking, application of acquired structures, acquisition from explicit specifications, acquisition from identifying observations, and retention and reuse. Each entry identifies a positive capacity commitment and a further claim requiring additional support. The argument deliberately grants meaningful content, causal efficacy, and productive inference, so that its conclusion does not depend on treating representations as inert encodings. Map and category examples show why even complete application competence leaves acquisition capacity undetermined, and why acquiring a criterion from its description differs from finding it in examples. Short formal proofs appear in an appendix. The framework is applied to Andrew Ng's world-model interpretation of Othello-GPT and to the specific indicators discussed in contemporary accounts of machine concepts. It preserves demonstrated recognition, classification, inference, and qualified acquisition while specifying what remains unestablished about criterion discovery and accumulation. The result concerns the scope of cognitive attribution rather than the constitutive conditions of concept possession: cognitive achievements deserve credit for the capacities they establish, without silently importing a broader repertoire through the labels attached to them.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Sep 2026.

Builds on

12 of 27 references.

References · 12

  1. 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretabilitycited by 839
  2. 2023Distilling Step-by-Step! Outperforming Larger Language Models with Less Training Data and Smaller Model Sizescited by 737
  3. 2022Transformers learn in-context by gradient descentcited by 732
  4. 2022Emergent World Representations: Exploring a Sequence Model Trained on a Synthetic Taskcited by 431
  5. 2026Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnetcited by 191
  6. 2023Phenomenal Yet Puzzling: Testing Inductive Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models with Hypothesis Refinementcited by 89
  7. 2023From task structures to world models: What do LLMs know?cited by 46
  8. 2023The Vector Grounding Problemcited by 39
  9. 2024Editing Conceptual Knowledge for Large Language Modelscited by 21
  10. 2024Are Language Models More Like Libraries or Like Librarians? Bibliotechnism, the Novel Reference Problem, and the Attitudes of LLMscited by 11
  11. 2024Anthropocentric bias in language model evaluationcited by 4
  12. 2025Beyond World Models: Rethinking Understanding in AI Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Information Structure in Mappings: An Approach to Learning, Representation, and Generalisation
  2. 2025Thinking on Maps: How Foundation Model Agents Explore, Remember, and Reason Map Environments
  3. 2026Human Cognition in Machines: A Unified Perspective of World Models
  4. 2026Context Cartography: Toward Structured Governance of Contextual Space in Large Language Model Systems
  5. 2026Multi-Resolution Attribution from Adaptive Routing State
  6. 2026State Design Matters: How Representations Shape Dynamic Reasoning in Large Language Models
  7. 2026Toward a Machine Bertin: Why Visualization Needs Design Principles for Machine Cognition
  8. 2026Do Maps Still Matter for Machines: Revisiting the Role of Choropleth Maps in Foundation Model Spatial Understanding