arXiv subjects

Lihao Sun

Publications and source records attributed to Lihao Sun.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

LLM Reasoning as Trajectories: Step-Specific Representation Geometry and Correctness Signals

This work characterizes large language models' chain-of-thought generation as a structured trajectory through representation space. We show that mathematical reasoning traverses functionally ordered, step-specific subspaces that become increasingly separable with layer depth. This structure already exists in base models, while reasoning training primarily accelerates convergence toward termination-related subspaces rather than introducing new representational organization. While early reasoning steps follow similar trajectories, correct and incorrect solutions diverge systematically at late stages. This late-stage divergence enables mid-reasoning prediction of final-answer correctness with ROC-AUC up to 0.87. Furthermore, we introduce trajectory-based steering, an inference-time intervention framework that enables reasoning correction and length control based on derived ideal trajectories. Together, these results establish reasoning trajectories as a geometric lens for interpreting, predicting, and controlling LLM reasoning behavior.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Valence-Arousal Subspace in LLMs: Circular Emotion Geometry and Multi-Behavioral Control

We show that emotion vectors in LLMs are organized by a two-dimensional valence-arousal (VA) subspace exhibiting circular geometry. Through principal component decomposition and ridge regression, we recover meaningful VA axes underlying emotion steering vectors whose projections correlate with human affect ratings across 44,728 words. Steering along these axes produces monotonic control over the affective properties of generated text, and further affords bidirectional control over multiple downstream behaviors (refusal and sycophancy) from a single subspace. These effects replicate across Llama-3.1-8B, Qwen3-8B, and Qwen3-14B. We propose lexical mediation to explain why these effects and prior emotionally framed controls work: refusal and compliance tokens occupy distinct VA regions, and VA steering directly modulates their emission probabilities.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

From Biased Chatbots to Biased Agents: Examining Role Assignment Effects on LLM Agent Robustness

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents capable of actions with real-world impacts beyond text generation. While persona-induced biases in text generation are well documented, their effects on agent task performance remain largely unexplored, even though such effects pose more direct operational risks. In this work, we present the first systematic case study showing that demographic-based persona assignments can alter LLM agents' behavior and degrade performance across diverse domains. Evaluating widely deployed models on agentic benchmarks spanning strategic reasoning, planning, and technical operations, we uncover substantial performance variations - up to 26.2% degradation, driven by task-irrelevant persona cues. These shifts appear across task types and model architectures, indicating that persona conditioning and simple prompt injections can distort an agent's decision-making reliability. Our findings reveal an overlooked vulnerability in current LLM agentic systems: persona assignments can introduce implicit biases and increase behavioral volatility, raising concerns for the safe and robust deployment of LLM agents.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Probing Scientific General Intelligence of LLMs with Scientist-Aligned Workflows

Despite advances in scientific AI, a coherent framework for Scientific General Intelligence (SGI)-the ability to autonomously conceive, investigate, and reason across scientific domains-remains lacking. We present an operational SGI definition grounded in the Practical Inquiry Model (PIM: Deliberation, Conception, Action, Perception) and operationalize it via four scientist-aligned tasks: deep research, idea generation, dry/wet experiments, and experimental reasoning. SGI-Bench comprises over 1,000 expert-curated, cross-disciplinary samples inspired by Science's 125 Big Questions, enabling systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs. Results reveal gaps: low exact match (10--20%) in deep research despite step-level alignment; ideas lacking feasibility and detail; high code executability but low execution result accuracy in dry experiments; low sequence fidelity in wet protocols; and persistent multimodal comparative-reasoning challenges. We further introduce Test-Time Reinforcement Learning (TTRL), which optimizes retrieval-augmented novelty rewards at inference, enhancing hypothesis novelty without reference answer. Together, our PIM-grounded definition, workflow-centric benchmark, and empirical insights establish a foundation for AI systems that genuinely participate in scientific discovery.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Aligned but Blind: Alignment Increases Implicit Bias by Reducing Awareness of Race

Although value-aligned language models (LMs) appear unbiased in explicit bias evaluations, they often exhibit stereotypes in implicit word association tasks, raising concerns about their fair usage. We investigate the mechanisms behind this discrepancy and find that alignment surprisingly amplifies implicit bias in model outputs. Specifically, we show that aligned LMs, unlike their unaligned counterparts, overlook racial concepts in early internal representations when the context is ambiguous. Not representing race likely fails to activate safety guardrails, leading to unintended biases. Inspired by this insight, we propose a new bias mitigation strategy that works by incentivizing the representation of racial concepts in the early model layers. In contrast to conventional mitigation methods of machine unlearning, our interventions find that steering the model to be more aware of racial concepts effectively mitigates implicit bias. Similar to race blindness in humans, ignoring racial nuances can inadvertently perpetuate subtle biases in LMs.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

The Geometry of Self-Verification in a Task-Specific Reasoning Model

How do reasoning models verify their own answers? We study this question by training a model using DeepSeek R1's recipe on the CountDown task. We leverage the fact that preference tuning leads to mode collapse, yielding a model that always produces highly structured chain-of-thought sequences. With this setup, we do top-down and bottom-up analyses to reverse-engineer how the model verifies its outputs. Top-down, we find Gated Linear Unit (GLU) weights encoding verification-related tokens, such as ``success'' or ``incorrect''. Bottom-up, we find that ``previous-token heads'' are mainly responsible for self-verification in our setup. Our analyses meet in the middle: drawing inspiration from inter-layer communication channels, we use the identified GLU weights to localize as few as three attention heads that can disable self-verification, pointing to a necessary component of a potentially larger verification circuit. Finally, we verify that similar verification components exist in our base model and a general reasoning DeepSeek-R1 model.

cs.AI↗