Training Language Models to Explain Their Own Computations

arXiv — cs.LGWednesday, November 12, 2025 at 5:00:00 AM
The study titled 'Training Language Models to Explain Their Own Computations' investigates the ability of language models (LMs) to articulate their internal workings. By fine-tuning LMs with tens of thousands of example explanations, researchers found that these models can generate coherent natural language descriptions of their features and causal structures. Notably, LMs exhibit a unique advantage when explaining their own computations, outperforming other models, regardless of their capabilities. This finding is significant as it not only confirms that LMs can learn to explain their computations reliably but also suggests that such explanations can serve as a valuable tool for enhancing interpretability in artificial intelligence. The implications of this research extend to improving transparency in AI systems, making it easier for users to understand how these models arrive at their outputs.
— via World Pulse Now AI Editorial System

Was this article worth reading? Share it

Recommended Readings
On the Entropy Calibration of Language Models
NeutralArtificial Intelligence
The paper examines entropy calibration in language models, focusing on whether their entropy aligns with log loss on human text. Previous studies indicated that as text generation lengthens, entropy increases while text quality declines, highlighting a fundamental issue in autoregressive models. The authors investigate whether miscalibration can improve with scale and if calibration without tradeoffs is theoretically feasible, analyzing the scaling behavior concerning dataset size and power law exponents.
Studies with impossible languages falsify LMs as models of human language
NeutralArtificial Intelligence
A study published on arXiv examines the learning capabilities of infants and language models (LMs) regarding attested versus impossible languages. The research indicates that both groups find attested languages easier to learn than those with unnatural structures. However, the findings reveal that LMs can learn many impossible languages as effectively as attested ones. The study suggests that the complexity of these languages, rather than their impossibility, contributes to the challenges faced by LMs, which lack the human inductive biases essential for language acquisition.
Are language models rational? The case of coherence norms and belief revision
NeutralArtificial Intelligence
The paper titled 'Are language models rational? The case of coherence norms and belief revision' explores the application of rationality norms, specifically coherence norms, to language models. It distinguishes between logical coherence norms and those related to the strength of belief. The authors introduce the Minimal Assent Connection (MAC), a new framework for understanding credence in language models based on internal token probabilities. The findings suggest that while some language models adhere to these rational norms, others do not, raising important questions about AI behavior and safety.