搜索结果：Mechanistic

While Mechanistic Interpretability has identified interpretable circuits in LLMs, their causal origins in training data remain elusive. We introduce Mechanistic Data Attribution (MDA), a scalable framework that employs Influence Functions to trace interpretable units back to specific training samples. Through extensive experiments on the Pythia family, we causally validate that targeted intervention--removing or augmenting a small fraction of high-influence samples--significantly modulates the emergence of interpretable heads, whereas random interventions show no effect. Our analysis reveals that repetitive structural data (e.g., LaTeX, XML) acts as a mechanistic catalyst. Furthermore, we observe that interventions targeting induction head formation induce a concurrent change in the model's in-context learning (ICL) capability. This provides direct causal evidence for the long-standing hypothesis regarding the functional link between induction heads and ICL. Finally, we propose a mechanistic data augmentation pipeline that consistently accelerates circuit convergence across model scales, providing a principled methodology for steering the developmental trajectories of LLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) have recently gained significant attention as a promising approach to accelerate scientific discovery. However, their application in open-ended scientific domains such as biology remains limited, primarily due to the lack of factually grounded and actionable explanations. To address this, we introduce a structured explanation formalism for virtual cells that represents biological reasoning as mechanistic action graphs, enabling systematic verification and falsification. Building upon this, we propose VCR-Agent, a multi-agent framework that integrates biologically grounded knowledge retrieval with a verifier-based filtering approach to generate and validate mechanistic reasoning autonomously. Using this framework, we release VC-TRACES dataset, which consists of verified mechanistic explanations derived from the Tahoe-100M atlas. Empirically, we demonstrate that training with these explanations improves factual precision and provides a more effective supervision signal for downstream gene expression prediction. These results underscore the importance of reliable mechanistic reasoning for virtual cells, achieved through the synergy of multi-agent and rigor

When learning interpretable latent structures using model-based approaches, even small deviations from modeling assumptions can lead to inferential results that are not mechanistically meaningful. In this work, we consider latent structures that consist of $K_o$ mechanistic processes, where $K_o$ is unknown. When the model is misspecified, likelihood-based model selection methods can substantially overestimate $K_o$ while more robust nonparametric methods can be overly conservative. Hence, there is a need for approaches that combine the sensitivity of likelihood-based methods with the robustness of nonparametric ones. We formalize this objective in terms of a robust model selection consistency property, which is based on a component-level discrepancy measure that captures the mechanistic structure of the model. We then propose the accumulated cutoff discrepancy criterion (ACDC), which leverages plug-in estimates of component-level discrepancies. To apply ACDC, we develop mechanistically meaningful component-level discrepancies for a general class of latent variable models that includes unsupervised and supervised variants of probabilistic matrix factorization and mixture modeling.

Hybrid mechanistic models, physical priors with learned residuals, promise to reduce the data required for good decisions, but have no computable criterion to test this. We characterize the value of mechanistic priors in sequential decision-making within both asymptotic and burn-in regimes. To formalize this, we introduce the mechanistic information of a model -- the mutual information between the model's recommended policy $\hatπ$ and the true optimal policy $π^*$ -- quantified via an occupancy-weighted bias $B_μ$. In the asymptotic regime (large $N$), matched bounds reveal that Bayesian regret scales with the residual entropy $H_{\mathrm{mech}}$, delivering a theoretical sample complexity reduction of $H(μ)/H_{\mathrm{mech}}$ compared to an uninformed baseline. Furthermore, we provide a model certificate to determine empirical sample efficiency. Complementarily, in the clinically relevant burn-in regime (small $N$), we establish a lower bound on the penalty incurred by confidently wrong priors. We demonstrate both the asymptotic and burn-in bounds across 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) dosing simulations motivated by published FOLFOX pharmacokinetic data, where a hybrid prior yields large

Mechanistic interpretability aims to explain neural model behaviour by reverse-engineering learned computational structure into human-understandable components. Without a formal framework, however, mechanistic explanations cannot be objectively verified, compared, or composed. We introduce compositional interpretability, a category-theoretic framework grounded in the principles of compositionality and minimum description length. Compositional interpretations are pairs of syntactic and semantic mappings that must commute to enforce consistency between a model's decomposition and its observed behaviour. We deconstruct explanation quality into measures of faithfulness and complexity to cast interpretability as a constrained optimisation problem, and introduce compressive refinement to systematically restructure models into simpler parts without altering their function. Finally, we derive a parsimony criterion under which syntactic compression theoretically guarantees more concise, human-aligned explanations. Our framework situates prominent mechanistic methods as subclasses of refinement, and clarifies why their compressibility heuristics tend to align with human interpretability. Our

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in constructing mechanistic models from data. However, existing evaluations largely focus on simplified settings and fail to capture the complexity of real-world scientific modeling. In practice, such modeling often involves neural-integrated formulations, where a mechanistic model component and a neural network component are jointly constructed, leading to a significantly more complex search space. Motivated by this gap, we introduce the Neural-Integrated Mechanistic Modeling (NIMM) benchmark, which evaluates LLM-generated neural-integrated mechanistic models across three scientific domains. Experiments on NIMM reveal that existing LLM-based approaches struggle to effectively explore this complex space, resulting in limited search stability and solution quality. To address this challenge, we propose NIMMGen, a tree-guided agentic framework that enables diversified exploration via branch-level search and improves solutions through atomic model refinement. Extensive experiments demonstrate that NIMMGen achieves state-of-the-art performance on NIMM, significantly improving search stability and solution quality.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has catalyzed the emergence of Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) that have pushed reasoning capabilities to new heights. While their performance has garnered significant excitement, exploring the internal mechanisms driving these behaviors has become an equally critical research frontier. This paper provides a comprehensive survey of the mechanistic understanding of LRMs, organizing recent findings into three core dimensions: 1) training dynamics, 2) reasoning mechanisms, and 3) unintended behaviors. By synthesizing these insights, we aim to bridge the gap between black-box performance and mechanistic transparency. Finally, we discuss under-explored challenges to outline a roadmap for future mechanistic studies, including the need for applied interpretability, improved methodologies, and a unified theoretical framework.

The recent field of neural algorithmic reasoning (NAR) studies the ability of graph neural networks (GNNs) to emulate classical algorithms like Bellman-Ford, a phenomenon known as algorithmic alignment. At the same time, recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have spawned the study of mechanistic interpretability, which aims to identify granular model components like circuits that perform specific computations. In this work, we introduce Mechanistic Interpretability for Neural Algorithmic Reasoning (MINAR), an efficient circuit discovery toolbox that adapts attribution patching methods from mechanistic interpretability to the GNN setting. We show through two case studies that MINAR recovers faithful neuron-level circuits from GNNs trained on algorithmic tasks. Our study sheds new light on the process of circuit formation and pruning during training, as well as giving new insight into how GNNs trained to perform multiple tasks in parallel reuse circuit components for related tasks. Our code is available at https://github.com/pnnl/MINAR.

Mechanistic Interpretability aims to understand neural networks through causal explanations. We argue for the Explanatory View Hypothesis: that Mechanistic Interpretability research is a principled approach to understanding models because neural networks contain implicit explanations which can be extracted and understood. We hence show that Explanatory Faithfulness, an assessment of how well an explanation fits a model, is well-defined. We propose a definition of Mechanistic Interpretability (MI) as the practice of producing Model-level, Ontic, Causal-Mechanistic, and Falsifiable explanations of neural networks, allowing us to distinguish MI from other interpretability paradigms and detail MI's inherent limits. We formulate the Principle of Explanatory Optimism, a conjecture which we argue is a necessary precondition for the success of Mechanistic Interpretability.

STEM education researchers are often interested in identifying moments of students' mechanistic reasoning for deeper analysis, but have limited capacity to search through many team conversation transcripts to find segments with a high concentration of such reasoning. We offer a solution in the form of an interpretable machine learning model that outputs time-varying probabilities that individual students are engaging in acts of mechanistic reasoning, leveraging evidence from their own utterances as well as contributions from the rest of the group. Using the toolkit of intentionally-designed probabilistic models, we introduce a specific inductive bias that steers the probabilistic dynamics toward desired, domain-aligned behavior. Experiments compare trained models with and without the inductive bias components, investigating whether their presence improves the desired model behavior on transcripts involving never-before-seen students and a novel discussion context. Our results show that the inductive bias improves generalization -- supporting the claim that interpretability is built into the model for this task rather than imposed post hoc. We conclude with practical recommendations

Mechanistic interpretability has transformed the analysis of transformer circuits by decomposing model behavior into competing algorithms, identifying phase transitions during training, and deriving closed-form predictions for when and why strategies shift. However, this program has remained largely confined to sequence-prediction architectures, leaving embodied control systems without comparable mechanistic accounts. Here we extend this framework to sensorimotor-cognitive development, using infant motor learning as a model system. We show that foundational inductive biases give rise to causal control circuits, with learned gating mechanisms converging toward theoretically motivated uncertainty thresholds. The resulting dynamics reveal a clean phase transition in the arbitration gate whose commitment behavior is well described by a closed-form exponential moving-average surrogate. We identify context window k as the critical parameter governing circuit formation: below a minimum threshold (k$\leq$4) the arbitration mechanism cannot form; above it (k$\geq$8), gate confidence scales asymptotically as log k. A two-dimensional phase diagram further reveals task-demand-dependent route a

Mechanistic interpretability aims to reverse engineer the computation performed by a neural network in terms of its internal components. Although there is a growing body of research on mechanistic interpretation of neural networks, the notion of a mechanistic interpretation itself is often ad-hoc. Inspired by the notion of abstract interpretation from the program analysis literature that aims to develop approximate semantics for programs, we give a set of axioms that formally characterize a mechanistic interpretation as a description that approximately captures the semantics of the neural network under analysis in a compositional manner. We demonstrate the applicability of these axioms for validating mechanistic interpretations on an existing, well-known interpretability study as well as on a new case study involving a Transformer-based model trained to solve the well-known 2-SAT problem.

Robust tooling and publicly available pre-trained models have helped drive recent advances in mechanistic interpretability for language models. However, similar progress in vision mechanistic interpretability has been hindered by the lack of accessible frameworks and pre-trained weights. We present Prisma (Access the codebase here: https://github.com/Prisma-Multimodal/ViT-Prisma), an open-source framework designed to accelerate vision mechanistic interpretability research, providing a unified toolkit for accessing 75+ vision and video transformers; support for sparse autoencoder (SAE), transcoder, and crosscoder training; a suite of 80+ pre-trained SAE weights; activation caching, circuit analysis tools, and visualization tools; and educational resources. Our analysis reveals surprising findings, including that effective vision SAEs can exhibit substantially lower sparsity patterns than language SAEs, and that in some instances, SAE reconstructions can decrease model loss. Prisma enables new research directions for understanding vision model internals while lowering barriers to entry in this emerging field.

Turning rich neuroimaging data into mechanistic insight remains challenging. Statistical models capture associations but remain largely agnostic to underlying mechanisms. Biophysical models embody candidate mechanisms but remain difficult to deploy without specialized expertise. Here, we present a hypothesis-first framework recasting model specifications as testable mechanistic hypotheses and streamlines the procedure for rejecting inappropriate hypotheses before moving to typical analyses. The key innovation is an expectation of model behavior under feature generalization constraints: we compute the model's expected $Y$ output across the parameter space based on the likelihood for a broader/distinct feature $Z$. Mirror statistical models are derived from these expected outputs and compared to the empirical ones with standard statistics. In synthetic experiments, our framework rejected mis-specified hypotheses and penalized unnecessary degrees of freedom while retaining valid hypotheses. These results demonstrate a practical hypothesis-driven approach for using mechanistic models in neuroimaging without requiring advanced training, complementing traditional analyses.

Modern reasoning models offer surprisingly strong zero-shot performance on challenging multi-label tasks that require selecting a small set of relevant options from hundreds of thousands to millions of candidate labels. We investigate how they achieve this mechanistically. We characterize reasoning as a two-phase process: A broad "shortlisting" of candidates followed by fine-grained reasoning over the resulting set. We provide evidence across a range of datasets that these steps can be isolated and are complementary. Using this characterization, we develop a mechanistic distillation strategy that consistently outperforms standard distillation.

Estimating intervention effects in dynamical systems is crucial for outcome optimization. In medicine, such interventions arise in physiological regulation (e.g., cardiovascular system under fluid administration) and pharmacokinetics, among others. Propofol administration is an anesthetic intervention, where the challenge is to estimate the optimal dose required to achieve a target brain concentration for anesthesia, given patient characteristics, while avoiding under- or over-dosing. The pharmacokinetic state is characterized by drug concentrations across tissues, and its dynamics are governed by prior states, patient covariates, drug clearance, and drug administration. While data-driven models can capture complex dynamics, they often fail in out-of-distribution (OOD) regimes. Mechanistic models on the other hand are typically robust, but might be oversimplified. We propose a hybrid mechanistic-data-driven approach to estimate time-dependent intervention outcomes. Our approach decomposes the dynamical system's transition operator into parametric and nonparametric components, further distinguishing between intervention-related and unrelated dynamics. This structure leverages mechan

Accurately predicting chemical reactions is essential for driving innovation in synthetic chemistry, with broad applications in medicine, manufacturing, and agriculture. At the same time, reaction prediction is a complex problem which can be both time-consuming and resource-intensive for chemists to solve. Deep learning methods offer an appealing solution by enabling high-throughput reaction prediction. However, many existing models are trained on the US Patent Office dataset and treat reactions as overall transformations: mapping reactants directly to products with limited interpretability or mechanistic insight. To address this, we introduce PMechRP (Polar Mechanistic Reaction Predictor), a system that trains machine learning models on the PMechDB dataset, which represents reactions as polar elementary steps that capture electron flow and mechanistic detail. To further expand model coverage and improve generalization, we augment PMechDB with a diverse set of combinatorially generated reactions. We train and compare a range of machine learning models, including transformer-based, graph-based, and two-step siamese architectures. Our best-performing approach was a hybrid model, whic

Federated Learning (FL) enables collaborative training of models on decentralized data, but its performance degrades significantly under Non-IID (non-independent and identically distributed) data conditions. While this accuracy loss is well-documented, the internal mechanistic causes remain a black box. This paper investigates the canonical FedAvg algorithm through the lens of Mechanistic Interpretability (MI) to diagnose this failure mode. We hypothesize that the aggregation of conflicting client updates leads to circuit collapse, the destructive interference of functional, sparse sub-networks responsible for specific class predictions. By training inherently interpretable, weight-sparse neural networks within an FL framework, we identify and track these circuits across clients and communication rounds. Using Intersection-over-Union (IoU) to quantify circuit preservation, we provide the first mechanistic evidence that Non-IID data distributions cause structurally distinct local circuits to diverge, leading to their degradation in the global model. Our findings reframe the problem of statistical drift in FL as a concrete, observable failure of mechanistic preservation, paving the w

Research on Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly focuses on identifying mechanistic explanations for their behaviors, yet the field lacks clear principles for determining when (and how) findings from one model instance generalize to another. This paper addresses a fundamental epistemological challenge: given a mechanistic claim about a particular model, what justifies extrapolating this finding to other LLMs -- and along which dimensions might such generalizations hold? I propose five potential axes of correspondence along which mechanistic claims might generalize, including: functional (whether they satisfy the same functional criteria), developmental (whether they develop at similar points during pretraining), positional (whether they occupy similar absolute or relative positions), relational (whether they interact with other model components in similar ways), and configurational (whether they correspond to particular regions or structures in weight-space). To empirically validate this framework, I analyze "1-back attention heads" (components attending to previous tokens) across pretraining in random seeds of the Pythia models (14M, 70M, 160M, 410M). The results reveal strik