# An Investigation of Model Coherence: Narrow Finetunes Contradict Themselves Under Resampling

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.12129 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.12129/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 10 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05566/) (2024)
- [Persona Vectors: Monitoring and Controlling Character Traits in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.21509/) (2025)
- [Model Organisms for Emergent Misalignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11613/) (2025)
- [School of Reward Hacks: Hacking harmless tasks generalizes to misaligned behavior in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.17511/) (2025)
- [Weird Generalization and Inductive Backdoors: New Ways to Corrupt LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.09742/) (2025)
- [LLMs Contain Multitudes: How Deployment Context Reshapes Model-Level Preferences and Values](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.13944/) (2026)
- [Incoherent Values? Probing LLM Preferences Through Parametric Variation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.21102/) (2026)
- [When Preferences Fail to Become Incentives: A Utility-Behavior Gap in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.22974/) (2026)
- [Innocuous-Seeming Data, Latent Ideology: Ideological Generalisation in Finetuned LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.14888/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

A large body of research measures model coherence based on output variance without adequately considering competing causes. We identify two such causes, ambiguity and indifference, and we introduce a set of 175 questions where contradicting answers cannot easily be explained by either. We then measure incoherence in terms of contradictions when resampling answers to the same question. In contrast to other methods our metric has high specificity, and only ranks models as incoherent when the issues are glaring. Even so, we find narrow finetunes score poorly. Inspecting inconsistencies flagged by our method, we find that model organisms from the literature display severe issues such as identity conflation, introspection failures and rationalizations. These findings suggest that the pathologies induced by narrow finetuning may limit what these models can tell us about coherent misaligned behaviour.