跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2606.16897 · v2

Contrastive-Difference CKA Reveals Concept-Specific Structural Alignment Across Language Model Architectures

首次提交 2026-06-16 00:07
版本更新 2026-11-09 15:44
雷达观测 2026-11-10 13:18
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Do language models encode the same prompted concepts in structurally compatible ways, beyond generic similarity induced by shared questions? We study contrastive-difference centered kernel alignment (CKAΔ\mathrm{CKA}_Δ), which compares per-question activation differences between opposing concept instructions. A matched same-concept versus cross-concept comparison separates the question of concept-conditioned structure from the magnitude of representational similarity. Across four checkpoints and eight personality-related traits, a fixed-final-layer analysis gives mean same- and cross-trait CKAΔ\mathrm{CKA}_Δ of 0.7259 and 0.6828. Trait-label randomization detects correspondence conditional on this model and prompt set (p=1/10001p=1/10001, one-sided), but a model-and-trait-weighted 95% interval for the difference is [−0.0330,0.1017][-0.0330,0.1017], limiting broader generalization. Strict question-group holdouts retain high same-trait linear recoverability. More stringently, maps and preprocessing fitted on seven traits transfer a source polarity classifier for the eighth trait to handwritten test questions: mean affine and orthogonal accuracies are 88.10% and 88.57%, versus 47.70% for shuffled pairing. Performance varies substantially across traits and model directions. Synthetic controls show why moderate CKA and high affine accuracy alone do not establish functional equivalence. The results support a scoped diagnostic of concept-specific structure and held-out linear recoverability; they do not establish universal invariance or a robust advantage over raw CKA across architectures.

作者备注:Accepted at ACML 2026 (Conference Track). 13-page main paper plus 18-page supplementary material. Revised theoretical statements and statistical analysis; added grouped holdouts and concept-held-out transfer evaluation; narrowed claims

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

本站首次收录为 v2,暂无更早版本可对照。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-11-09 15:44 · 最新观测版本

Contrastive-Difference CKA Reveals Concept-Specific Structural Alignment Across Language Model Architectures

Do language models encode the same prompted concepts in structurally compatible ways, beyond generic similarity induced by shared questions? We study contrastive-difference centered kernel alignment (CKAΔ\mathrm{CKA}_Δ), which compares per-question activation differences between opposing concept instructions. A matched same-concept versus cross-concept comparison separates the question of concept-conditioned structure from the magnitude of representational similarity. Across four checkpoints and eight personality-related traits, a fixed-final-layer analysis gives mean same- and cross-trait CKAΔ\mathrm{CKA}_Δ of 0.7259 and 0.6828. Trait-label randomization detects correspondence conditional on this model and prompt set (p=1/10001p=1/10001, one-sided), but a model-and-trait-weighted 95% interval for the difference is [−0.0330,0.1017][-0.0330,0.1017], limiting broader generalization. Strict question-group holdouts retain high same-trait linear recoverability. More stringently, maps and preprocessing fitted on seven traits transfer a source polarity classifier for the eighth trait to handwritten test questions: mean affine and orthogonal accuracies are 88.10% and 88.57%, versus 47.70% for shuffled pairing. Performance varies substantially across traits and model directions. Synthetic controls show why moderate CKA and high affine accuracy alone do not establish functional equivalence. The results support a scoped diagnostic of concept-specific structure and held-out linear recoverability; they do not establish universal invariance or a robust advantage over raw CKA across architectures.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗