Token Embeddings Violate the Manifold Hypothesis
Michael Robinson, Sourya Dey, Tony Chiang
Abstract
A full understanding of the behavior of a large language model (LLM) requires our grasp of its input token space. If this space differs from our assumptions, our comprehension of and conclusions about the LLM will likely be flawed. We elucidate the structure of the token embeddings both empirically and theoretically. We present a novel statistical test assuming that the neighborhood around each token has a relatively flat and smooth structure as the null hypothesis. Failing to reject the null is uninformative, but rejecting it at a specific token implies an irregularity in the token subspace in a -neighborhood, . The structure assumed in the null is a generalization of a manifold with boundary called a smooth fiber bundle (which can be split into two spatial regimes -- small and large radius), so we denote our new hypothesis test as the ``fiber bundle hypothesis.''By running our test over several open-source LLMs, each with unique token embeddings, we find that the null is frequently rejected, and so the evidence suggests that the token subspace is not a fiber bundle and hence also not a manifold. As a consequence of our findings, when an LLM is presented with two semantically equivalent prompts, if one prompt contains a token implicated by our test, the response to that prompt will likely exhibit less stability than the other.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers5
- ASIDE: Architectural Separation of Instructions and Data in Language ModelsEgor Zverev, Evgenii Kortukov, Alexander Panfilov, Alexandra Volkova et al.ICLR 2026 · 28 citations
- Semantic Tube Prediction: Beating LLM Data Efficiency with JEPAHai Huang, Yann LeCun, Randall BalestrieroICML 2026 · 8 citations
- The Information Geometry of Softmax: Probing and SteeringKiho Park, Todd Nief, Yo Joong Choe, Victor VeitchICML 2026 · 6 citations
- Routing Manifold Alignment Improves Generalization of Mixture-of-Experts LLMsZhongyang Li, Ziyue Li, Tianyi ZhouICLR 2026 · 5 citations
- Revisiting Anisotropy in Language Transformers: The Geometry of Learning DynamicsRaphael Bernas, Fanny Jourdan, Antonin Poché, Céline HudelotICML 2026 · 3 citations
Builds on9
- Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingMelanie Sclar, Yejin Choi, Yulia Tsvetkov, Alane SuhrICLR 2024 · 682 citations
- On the Planning Abilities of Large Language Models - A Critical InvestigationKarthik Valmeekam, Matthew Marquez, Sarath Sreedharan, Subbarao KambhampatiNeurIPS 2023 · 509 citations
- Llemma: An Open Language Model for MathematicsZhangir Azerbayev, Hailey Schoelkopf, Keiran Paster, Marco Dos Santos et al.ICLR 2024 · 433 citations
- Intrinsic Dimension Estimation for Robust Detection of AI-Generated TextsEduard Tulchinskii, Kristian Kuznetsov, Laida Kushnareva, Daniil Cherniavskii et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 163 citations
- Ensemble Learning for Heterogeneous Large Language Models with Deep Parallel CollaborationYichong Huang, Xiaocheng Feng, Baohang Li, Yang Xiang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 94 citations
Related papers
- How Stable is the Next Token? A Geometric View of LLM Prediction StabilityDeyuan Liu, Zecheng Wang, Zhanyue Qin, Zhiying Tu et al.ICLR 2026
- Lines of Thought in Large Language ModelsRaphaël Sarfati, Toni J. B. Liu, Nicolas Boullé, Christopher J. EarlsICLR 2025
- Isotropy in the Contextual Embedding Space: Clusters and ManifoldsXingyu Cai, Jiaji Huang, Yuchen Bian, Kenneth ChurchICLR 2021 · 50 citations
- Statistical Hypothesis Testing for Auditing Robustness in Language ModelsPaulius Rauba, Qiyao Wei, Mihaela van der SchaarICML 2025
- Symmetries in language statistics shape the geometry of model representationsDhruva Karkada, Daniel Korchinski, Andres Nava, Matthieu Wyart et al.ICML 2026 · 15 citations
