mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Language Models Differ in Redistributing Attention-Head Activity Under Serial Demand

arXiv 2609.36221 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The way a model distributes activity over each layer's attention heads offers a coarse view of how it routes information through depth; how this changes with the task is part of what a mechanistic account must explain. Holding prompt length fixed, we vary how many serial steps a task demands and measure, in every layer of 17 open-weight models, whether activity concentrates on a few heads or spreads across many as demand rises. Both occur: in most models, layers just before mid-depth concentrate activity and later layers spread it. Models differ in where and how strongly this happens. The Qwen2.5 base models from 0.5B to 7B, for example, spread less than the average model in every task and concentrate activity in parts of their second half, where Llama models from 1B to 8B and OLMo-2 spread; the contrast largely holds between Llama-3.1-70B and Qwen2.5-72B, which have the same number of layers and heads. These differences are reproducible, and post-trained models keep much of their base model's pattern. An ablation study suggests that, within a task, models whose activity is more concentrated on their top heads also depend more on those heads for the answer. Concentration and spreading across layers thus offer a new way to compare models, by how they route information through depth. Code is available at https://github.com/johnnyjli/serial-demand-heads.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.

Builds on

25 of 29 references.

References · 25

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  3. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  4. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  5. 2023Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinkscited by 2,186
  6. 2019Similarity of Neural Network Representations Revisitedcited by 1,755
  7. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
  8. 2022Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Modelscited by 1,075
  9. 2019Analyzing Multi-Head Self-Attention: Specialized Heads Do the Heavy Lifting, the Rest Can Be Prunedcited by 856
  10. 2019Are Sixteen Heads Really Better than One?cited by 816
  11. 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
  12. 2023Dissecting Recall of Factual Associations in Auto-Regressive Language Modelscited by 528
13 more
  1. 2024The Platonic Representation Hypothesiscited by 382
  2. 2024Massive Activations in Large Language Modelscited by 294
  3. 2023How does GPT-2 compute greater-than?: Interpreting mathematical abilities in a pre-trained language modelcited by 202
  4. 2024Do Large Language Models Latently Perform Multi-Hop Reasoning?cited by 169
  5. 2024Fine-Tuning Enhances Existing Mechanisms: A Case Study on Entity Trackingcited by 149
  6. 2024The Remarkable Robustness of LLMs: Stages of Inference?cited by 146
  7. 2023A Toy Model of Universality: Reverse Engineering How Networks Learn Group Operationscited by 144
  8. 2023Mechanistically analyzing the effects of fine-tuning on procedurally defined taskscited by 115
  9. 2024Universal Neurons in GPT2 Language Modelscited by 102
  10. 2024Information Flow Routes: Automatically Interpreting Language Models at Scalecited by 95
  11. 2024Transformers, parallel computation, and logarithmic depthcited by 79
  12. 2024Hopping Too Late: Exploring the Limitations of Large Language Models on Multi-Hop Queriescited by 78
  13. 2025Do Language Models Use Their Depth Efficiently?cited by 50

Built on by

Not cited yet.