mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Subliminal Prompting Beyond Static Geometry: Causal Depth and Multi-Token Confounds

arXiv 2609.19149 ↗First posted 20 Jul 2026cs.CL cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Subliminal learning shows that language models can transmit a hidden trait through outputs that appear unrelated to it. One proposed explanation, token entanglement, links animal and number tokens through the model's output vocabulary. Yet existing measurements answer different questions: whether outputs co-vary, fixed output vectors align, an answer can be read from a hidden state, or that state causally controls the answer. We measure each separately in a fixed animal-number prompting protocol. From Llama-3.1-8B to 70B, fixed output-vector similarity predicts behavior less well: the paired mean correlation change is -0.080 (95% CI [-0.127, -0.035]). A fixed output-head readout shows no resolved change in normalized depth AUC. To test control, we copy the temporary answer-position state from one number prompt into another at five depths and measure which prompt the final animal score follows. Donor-control AUC rises from 0.254 to 0.540, a paired change of +0.286 (95% CI [+0.272, +0.300]), with increases for all 18 concepts. The contrast remains with exactly eight transformer blocks remaining, while specificity and identity controls remain small or exact. In two Qwen models, scoring every digit in sequence does not recover the positive one-token association. Per-token averaging instead creates a positive pooled association that disappears after controlling number width, revealing a length confound. Thus, fixed geometry, observational readability, causal timing, and multi-token measurement are distinct properties of this frozen prompting channel. They constrain token-level explanations but do not identify the mechanism of training-time trait transfer.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Jul 2026.

Builds on

12 of 18 references.

References · 12

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
  3. 2022Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Build Predictions by Promoting Concepts in the Vocabulary Spacecited by 532
  4. 2023Towards Best Practices of Activation Patching in Language Models: Metrics and Methodscited by 359
  5. 2023Does Circuit Analysis Interpretability Scale? Evidence from Multiple Choice Capabilities in Chinchillacited by 149
  6. 2025Subliminal Learning: Language models transmit behavioral traits via hidden signals in datacited by 95
  7. 2025Towards Understanding Subliminal Learning: When and How Hidden Biases Transfercited by 34
  8. 2024Where is the signal in tokenization space?cited by 21
  9. 2026Subliminal Steering: Stronger Encoding of Hidden Signalscited by 14
  10. 2026Learning Through Noise: Why Subliminal Learning Works and When It Failscited by 7
  11. 2026Channel Location Constrains the Auditability of Subliminal Learningcited by 7
  12. 2026Covert Trait Propagation Is Representation Alignment: Mechanistic Evidence from Hidden-Channel Distillationcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.