Task Context Shapes Component Roles in Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models reuse the same attention heads across tasks, but identifying these shared heads does not explain what they do differently in each task. A natural source of inspiration is task-dependent interactions among shared brain regions, which motivate a network view of language-model computation. Here, we compare fixed model components across tasks using identical graph facts, statements specifying which directed connections are present. We measure how interventions affect attention heads and the activation state in later layers (influence), as well as the answer (importance). Task changes redistribute the influence in five open-weight models spanning four families and 1.5-14 billion parameters. In Gemma-2-9B and Qwen3-14B, an activation edit changes an early internal activation vector and switches which fact the model reads while the written instruction stays fixed. The same heads then respond to different graph facts and influence later components differently. For each prompt, we construct two linear response maps, one before the edit and one after it. Each map predicts a later head's response from a measured change in an earlier head. For a separate factual intervention, the map for the corresponding condition reduces mean squared prediction error by 53.6% in Gemma and 5.0% in Qwen compared with the average of the two maps. These findings show that task context changes both which graph facts the shared components respond to and how their outputs affect later computation. A network account may help explain how models use shared parameters to perform different computations. Measurements of task-dependent influence could also guide interventions intended to alter one behavior while preserving others.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2026.
Builds on
20 of 29 references.
References · 20
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
- 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
- 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,085
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
- 2024Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Modelscited by 435
- 2023Towards Best Practices of Activation Patching in Language Models: Metrics and Methodscited by 359
- 2023In-Context Learning Creates Task Vectorscited by 312
- 2023Function Vectors in Large Language Modelscited by 308
8 more
- 2024Transcoders Find Interpretable LLM Feature Circuitscited by 200
- 2023Circuit Component Reuse Across Tasks in Transformer Language Modelscited by 108
- 2025Falcon-H1: A Family of Hybrid-Head Language Models Redefining Efficiency and Performancecited by 57
- 2024Talking Heads: Understanding Inter-layer Communication in Transformer Language Modelscited by 41
- 2025Brain-Inspired Exploration of Functional Networks and Key Neurons in Large Language Modelscited by 5
- 2025Mechanism of Task-oriented Information Removal in In-context Learningcited by 4
- 2026Modular Cognitive Architecture Emerges in Large Language Modelscited by 3
- 2025Localizing Task Recognition and Task Learning in In-Context Learning via Attention Head Analysiscited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.