# Rewired or Gated? How Instruction Tuning Shapes Knowledge-Conflict Circuits in LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.25602 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.25602/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Activation steering methods, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability.
- Builds on 18 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- Mechanistic interpretability / [Activation steering methods](https://mlsanity.com/mechinterp/activation-steering-methods/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.05262/) (2022)
- [Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 small](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.00593/) (2022)
- [Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14997/) (2023)
- [Entity-Based Knowledge Conflicts in Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.05052/) (2021)
- [Adaptive Chameleon or Stubborn Sloth: Revealing the Behavior of Large Language Models in Knowledge Conflicts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13300/) (2023)
- [Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.08319/) (2024)
- [Fine-Tuning Enhances Existing Mechanisms: A Case Study on Entity Tracking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14811/) (2024)
- [Have Faith in Faithfulness: Going Beyond Circuit Overlap When Finding Model Mechanisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.17806/) (2024)
- [Cutting Off the Head Ends the Conflict: A Mechanism for Interpreting and Mitigating Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.18154/) (2024)
- [FaithEval: Can Your Language Model Stay Faithful to Context, Even If "The Moon is Made of Marshmallows"](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03727/) (2024)
- [From Language Modeling to Instruction Following: Understanding the Behavior Shift in LLMs after Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00492/) (2023)
- [Taming Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.10996/) (2025)
- [Studying Large Language Model Behaviors Under Context-Memory Conflicts With Real Documents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16032/) (2024)
- [EAP-GP: Mitigating Saturation Effect in Gradient-based Automated Circuit Identification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06852/) (2025)
- [Towards Understanding Fine-Tuning Mechanisms of LLMs via Circuit Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11812/) (2025)
- [Mechanistic Interpretability as Statistical Estimation: A Variance Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.00845/) (2025)
- [Investigating Context-Faithfulness in Large Language Models: The Roles of Memory Strength and Evidence Style](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.10955/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In language models, the choice between believing the prompt and believing the weights is made by a handful of identifiable attention heads. Instruction tuning changes how models behave under conflict, but whether it rewires the underlying circuit or merely gates/reweights already present components, remains unknown. We provide the first mechanistic base-vs-instruct comparison of conflict-resolution circuits, across three families (Llama-3.2-3B, Qwen-2.5-3B, Gemma-3-4B). Five independent methods, node and edge attribution, superposition role analysis, causal ablation, and path patching, converge on gating, with the same heads, in the same late-layers, are found to be reweighted rather than replaced with a high node overlap (0.60-0.82). Behaviorally, tuning shifts models toward parametric memory, making instruct models reject a terse counterfactual context far more than base ones, the opposite of a naive user-following expectation. Yet this added skepticism is a factor of framing since it disappears when the same false claim is delivered as a coherent, evidential passage. The robustness that instruction tuning buys against terse injection is therefore real but narrow. More broadly, we believe that because the conflict circuit is preserved rather than rebuilt, interpretability and control tools calibrated on base models should transfer directly to their deployed instruct siblings.