跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-srw.20 · 记录 #1

Sycophantic Anchors: Localizing and Quantifying User Agreement in Reasoning Models

来源日期(仅到月份) 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:44
ACL Anthology · ACL 2026 ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Reasoning models frequently agree with incorrect user suggestions - a behavior known as sycophancy. However, it is unclear where in the reasoning trace this agreement originates and how strong the commitment is. We introduce sycophantic anchors - sentences identified via counterfactual analysis that commit models to user agreement. Across four reasoning models spanning three architecture families (Llama, Qwen, Falcon-hybrid) and 1.5B - 8B parameters, we analyze over 200,000 counterfactual rollouts and show that linear probes reliably detect sycophantic anchors (74 - 85% balanced accuracy), outperforming text-only baselines at high commitment levels -confirming they capture internal states beyond surface vocabulary. Regressors further predict commitment strength from activations (R^2 up to 0.74). We observe a consistent asymmetry: sycophancy leaves a stronger mechanistic footprint than correct reasoning. We also find that sycophancy builds gradually during generation rather than being determined by the prompt. These findings enable sentence-level detection and quantification of model misalignment mid-inference.

论文发现出处

这些页面提供论文线索,不代表同行评审或质量认证。

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。

发表信息与关联版本

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化,不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时,按该月或该年首日存档。

记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本

Sycophantic Anchors: Localizing and Quantifying User Agreement in Reasoning Models

Reasoning models frequently agree with incorrect user suggestions - a behavior known as sycophancy. However, it is unclear where in the reasoning trace this agreement originates and how strong the commitment is. We introduce sycophantic anchors - sentences identified via counterfactual analysis that commit models to user agreement. Across four reasoning models spanning three architecture families (Llama, Qwen, Falcon-hybrid) and 1.5B - 8B parameters, we analyze over 200,000 counterfactual rollouts and show that linear probes reliably detect sycophantic anchors (74 - 85% balanced accuracy), outperforming text-only baselines at high commitment levels -confirming they capture internal states beyond surface vocabulary. Regressors further predict commitment strength from activations (R^2 up to 0.74). We observe a consistent asymmetry: sycophancy leaves a stronger mechanistic footprint than correct reasoning. We also find that sycophancy builds gradually during generation rather than being determined by the prompt. These findings enable sentence-level detection and quantification of model misalignment mid-inference.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗