Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently exhibit sycophancy, where they agree with a user's statement even when incorrect. While sycophancy is often treated as a single defined behavior, it can manifest in substantially distinct ways and circumstances, raising the question of whether this multi-faceted nature is reflected in its internal mechanisms. To address this gap, we dissociate the representations of sycophancy into factual and opinion subtypes -- motivated by the distinction between verifiable claims and subjective beliefs. We train linear probes and construct steering vectors on activations of one subtype and evaluate their transfer to the other subtype to measure to what extent they share representations. We find evidence that different LLMs represent these subtypes differently, with either more unified or more distinct and causally interfering representations. This method of dissociation offers a promising framework for studying the representational structure of complex model behaviors.
Modern LLMs are alarmingly susceptible to surprisingly simple immaterial changes of input prompts: a casual hint, an incorrectly labeled few-shot example, or a fake prior assistant turn often flips an originally correct answer. We study where this susceptibility, spanning sycopha…
Large language models generate one token at a time, yet their responses show remarkably consistent length structure: step-by-step solutions converge in predictable token counts, retrievals stop after a few sentences, retractions extend responses by measurable amounts. We ask whet…
Although LLMs have made significant progress in mathematical reasoning, determining whether a mathematical problem is solvable remains a fundamental yet challenging capability. While recent studies have probed internal representations of model solvability beliefs, verbalization h…
Authority bias poses a critical safety concern in language models: models systematically prioritize social cues from authority figures over factual consistency, swaying their answers based on source credibility rather than evidence. We mechanistically investigate this phenomenon…
Language models deployed in high-stakes roles can potentially favor certain entities, brands, or viewpoints, steering user decisions at scale. Such preferential biases can be introduced by any actor in the model's supply chain and are most dangerous when the model reveals its pre…
Language models have changed from unreliable text generators to highly-capable large models with trillions of parameters. Capability increases come hand-in-hand with increases in scale, making understanding the internal representations of models more challenging. Since millions o…