LatentQA: Teaching LLMs to Decode Activations Into Natural Language
Alexander Pan, Lijie Chen, Jacob Steinhardt
Abstract
Top-down transparency typically analyzes language model activations using probes with scalar or single-token outputs, limiting the range of behaviors that can be captured. To alleviate this issue, we develop a more expressive probe that can directly output natural language, performing LatentQA: the task of answering open-ended questions about activations. A key difficulty in developing such a probe is collecting a dataset mapping activations to natural-language descriptions. In response, we propose an approach for generating a dataset of activations and associated question-answer pairs and develop a fine-tuning method for training a decoder LLM on this dataset. We then validate our decoder's fidelity by assessing its ability to read and control model activations. First, we evaluate the decoder on a number of supervised reading tasks with a known answer, such as uncovering hidden system prompts and relational knowledge extraction, and observe that it outperforms competitive probing baselines. Second, we demonstrate that the decoder is precise enough to steer the target model to exhibit behaviors unseen during training. Finally, we show that LatentQA scales well with increasing dataset and model size.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 97d09737-30c0-457f-be70-f090a2d6f129Cited by top-tier papers9
- Activation Oracles: Training and Evaluating LLMs as General-Purpose Activation ExplainersAdam Karvonen, James Chua, Clément Dumas, Kit Fraser-Taliente et al.ICML 2026 · 42 citations
- Narrow Finetuning Leaves Clearly Readable Traces in Activation DifferencesJulian Minder, Clément Dumas, Stewart Slocum, Helena Casademunt et al.ICLR 2026 · 29 citations
- LARGO: Latent Adversarial Reflection through Gradient Optimization for Jailbreaking LLMsRan Li, Hao Wang, Chengzhi MaoNeurIPS 2025 · 10 citations
- Learning to Interpret Weight Differences in Language ModelsAvichal Goel, Yoon Kim, Nir N Shavit, Tony T. WangICLR 2026 · 10 citations
- Introspection Adapters: Training LLMs to Report Their Learned BehaviorsKeshav Shenoy, Li Yang, Abhay Sheshadri, Jack Lindsey et al.ICML 2026 · 5 citations
Builds on27
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Visual Instruction TuningHaotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, Yong Jae LeeNeurIPS 2023 · 11,349 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTKevin Meng, David Bau, Alex Andonian, Yonatan BelinkovNeurIPS 2022 · 3,415 citations
- Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language ModelKenneth Li, Oam Patel, Fernanda B. Viégas, Hanspeter Pfister et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 1,549 citations
Related papers
- Steering When Necessary: Flexible Steering Large Language Models with BacktrackingZifeng Cheng, Jinwei Gan, Zhiwei Jiang, Cong Wang et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 9 citations
- Mechanisms vs. Outcomes: Probing for Syntax Fails to Explain Performance on Targeted Syntactic EvaluationsAnanth Agarwal, Jasper Jian, Christopher D. Manning, Shikhar MurtyEMNLP 2025 · 5 citations
- Fine-Grained Controllable Text Generation Using Non-Residual PromptingFredrik Carlsson, Joey Öhman, Fangyu Liu, Severine Verlinden et al.ACL 2022
- ActivationReasoning: Logical Reasoning in Latent Activation SpacesLukas Helff, Ruben Härle, Wolfgang Stammer, Felix Friedrich et al.ICLR 2026 · 6 citations
- Predicting Fine-Tuning Performance with ProbingZining Zhu, Soroosh Shahtalebi, Frank RudziczEMNLP 2022 · 6 citations
