Sampling Reveals Style: Unsupervised, Training-Free Discovery of Prompt-Conditional Stylistic Axes in LLM Activations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) encode rich stylistic structure in their hidden activations, but discovering which stylistic dimensions are salient for a given prompt typically requires supervised contrastive data. We present a training-free, prompt-conditional alternative: we repeatedly sample completions of a single prompt at elevated temperature, apply Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to the pooled hidden activations, and label the resulting axes automatically from the pole generations. We validate the discovered axes against 245 human-elicited stylistic annotations in a two-phase study. On our strongest model (Qwen-3.5-4B-Instruct), the top two axes match spontaneously requested human dimensions with 72.8% precision and 43.6% macro-recall, and 75.6% of validity ratings judge the axes' polar generations accurate to their labels, with 90.9% adjacent inter-annotator agreement. Discoverability is strongly model-dependent: both Qwen models and Llama-3.2-3B expose human-salient axes, while DeepSeek-7B-Chat drops to 35.3% precision, its leading components dominated by structural rather than stylistic variance. Simple PCA over a model's own decoding variance is thus an effective, low-cost probe of stylistic structure in LLM representations, one that also exposes sharp cross-model differences in how that structure is organized.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Jul 2026.
Builds on
18 of 28 references.
References · 18
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,085
- 2020MPNet: Masked and Permuted Pre-training for Language Understandingcited by 981
- 2023Steering Language Models With Activation Engineeringcited by 922
- 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 686
- 2025AxBench: Steering LLMs? Even Simple Baselines Outperform Sparse Autoencoderscited by 218
- 2024Not All Language Model Features Are One-Dimensionally Linearcited by 212
- 2024Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steeringcited by 206
- 2024Improving Instruction-Following in Language Models through Activation Steeringcited by 160
- 2024Personalized Steering of Large Language Models: Versatile Steering Vectors Through Bi-directional Preference Optimizationcited by 118
- 2025Are Sparse Autoencoders Useful? A Case Study in Sparse Probingcited by 115
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysiscited by 88
6 more
- 2025I Have Covered All the Bases Here: Interpreting Reasoning Features in Large Language Models via Sparse Autoencoderscited by 45
- 2024Multi-property Steering of Large Language Models with Dynamic Activation Compositioncited by 39
- 2024Quantifying Feature Space Universality Across Large Language Models via Sparse Autoencoderscited by 27
- 2024Improving Instruction Following in Language Models through Proxy-Based Uncertainty Estimationcited by 6
- 2026Steering LLMs? Actually, Sparse Autoencoders can outperform simple baselinescited by 3
- 2026Mechanistically Eliciting Latent Behaviors in Language Modelscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.