arXiv:2606.02907v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Linear probing of large language model (LLM) hidden states is widely used to claim that models learn distinct representations for different reasoning types. We test this by probing Qwen3-14B on three benchmarks spanning the classical trichotomy: LogiQA 2.0 (deductive), ARC-Challenge (inductive), and $\alpha$NLI (abductive). At layer 32 of 40, linear probes achieve 100\% cross-validated accuracy with well-separated geometry (intrinsic dimensionalities: 20.6, 28.5, 33.6; convex hull contamination $\leq$1.5\%). However, this separation is entirely driven by format confounds. Residualizing source identity, option count, and response length reduces accuracy to chance. Trace-anchor similarity indicates largely shared reasoning across tasks (42.5\% agreement vs.\ 33.3\% chance), and causal steering with random controls ($n=20$) shows no functional link between geometry and reasoning mode ($p=0.286$). Thus, high probe accuracy reflects task format rather than computational structure, motivating routine format deconfounding in mechanistic interpretability.
Linear Probes Detect Task Format, Not Reasoning Mode in Language Model Hidden States
Linear probes applied to Qwen3-14B hidden states achieve 100% accuracy in distinguishing deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning tasks, but this separation is entirely driven by format confounds such as source identity and response length. After residualizing these format features, probe accuracy drops to chance, and causal steering experiments show no functional link between the geometric separation and actual reasoning modes. The findings demonstrate that high probe accuracy reflects task format rather than computational structure, calling for routine format deconfounding in mechanistic interpretability research.
Run your AI side-project on zahid.host
EU-based hosting, git-push deploys, automatic HTTPS, no cold starts. Free tier with a custom domain — perfect for shipping the agent you just read about.