Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Latent Causal Probing: A Formal Perspective on Probing with Causal Models of Data (2407.13765v2)

Published 18 Jul 2024 in cs.CL and cs.AI

Abstract: As LLMs (LMs) deliver increasing performance on a range of NLP tasks, probing classifiers have become an indispensable technique in the effort to better understand their inner workings. A typical setup involves (1) defining an auxiliary task consisting of a dataset of text annotated with labels, then (2) supervising small classifiers to predict the labels from the representations of a pretrained LM as it processed the dataset. A high probing accuracy is interpreted as evidence that the LM has learned to perform the auxiliary task as an unsupervised byproduct of its original pretraining objective. Despite the widespread usage of probes, however, the robust design and analysis of probing experiments remains a challenge. We develop a formal perspective on probing using structural causal models (SCM). Specifically, given an SCM which explains the distribution of tokens observed during training, we frame the central hypothesis as whether the LM has learned to represent the latent variables of the SCM. Empirically, we extend a recent study of LMs in the context of a synthetic grid-world navigation task, where having an exact model of the underlying causal structure allows us to draw strong inferences from the result of probing experiments. Our techniques provide robust empirical evidence for the ability of LMs to induce the latent concepts underlying text.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (2)
  1. Charles Jin (7 papers)
  2. Martin Rinard (42 papers)
Citations (1)

Summary

Latent Causal Probing: A Formal Perspective on Probing with Causal Models of Data

The paper "Latent Causal Probing: A Formal Perspective on Probing with Causal Models of Data" by Charles Jin provides a rigorous investigation into the probing of LLMs (LMs) using structural causal models (SCM). Probing classifiers have been widely used to discern the internal mechanisms of LMs trained on large, unannotated corpora by determining whether these models can perform auxiliary tasks. The paper addresses critical challenges in probing experiments such as control and interpretation, classifier selection, and auxiliary task design, proposing an approach that leverages the formal framework of structural causal models.

Formal Framework for Probing

The authors introduce a formal methodology using SCMs to understand whether LMs have learned to represent latent variables, which are causally influential but not directly observed in training data. SCMs are employed to encapsulate the causal relationships within a data generation process. The paper extends to an empirical evaluation involving a synthetic grid-world navigation task where LMs trained on this controlled data are probed for their ability to infer latent causal structures.

Empirical Evaluation in Synthetic Environments

In their empirical work, the authors extend the analysis to the context of a grid-world navigation task, borrowing methodologies from previous work by Jin. Their experiments aim to quantify the extent to which LMs can deduce "meaning," defined in this setup by the semantics of the navigation tasks using a synthetic programming language.

The results demonstrate that LMs not only learn to represent latent causal variables but also exhibit inductive biases enabling generalization to novel data sequences. This supports the hypothesis that LLMs can function as latent concept learners, acquiring deeper semantic understanding than explicit training objectives suggest.

Causal Mediation in Probing

A significant aspect of the framework is its ability to separate the contribution of the LM from that of the probing classifier, a recognized obstacle in probing studies. The analysis is executed through causal mediation techniques, providing a formal guarantee for the interpretability of probe results. The authors outline a strategy to isolate the effect of LMs learning latent causal concepts, separating it from the classifier's capacity to extract these concepts.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

The paper presents a methodologically robust approach with potential impact on both theoretical understanding and practical application of NLP models. By demonstrating that LMs can learn latent causal representations, the paper invites a reevaluation of how LM training objectives might implicitly aid in learning higher-order concepts. The methodology and findings have implications for constructing more interpretable and accurate models by understanding the extent and limits of latent concept learning.

Future Directions

The implications of this research are manifold, suggesting avenues for future investigation in AI and NLP. Exploring the applicability of this framework to real-world datasets could provide deeper insights into more complex linguistic and reasoning capabilities of LMs. Moreover, refining probing techniques by integrating causal mediation analysis could enhance the fidelity of probing as a tool to examine and to possibly even guide model behavior training.

In conclusion, Charles Jin's work on latent causal probing represents an important step in formalizing our understanding of how LMs encode latent information, with the potential to spark further advancements in the interpretability and application of LLMs.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com