What Drives Representation Steering? A Mechanistic Case Study on Steering Refusal

arXiv:2604.08524 · cs.LG, cs.AI, cs.CL · Submitted 2026-04-09 · Read on arXiv

cs.LG, cs.AI, cs.CL

Submitted: 2026-04-09

Updated: 2026-09-01

Comments: EMNLP 2026 Main Conference. Updated from previous preprint to contain experiments on Qwen 3 8B, revised explanation of attribution patching method, and additional results in appendix

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The gist: Applying steering vectors to large language models (LLMs) is an efficient and effective model alignment technique, but we lack an interpretable explanation for how it works--specifically, what

Terminology

Abstract

Applying steering vectors to large language models (LLMs) is an efficient and effective model alignment technique, but we lack an interpretable explanation for how it works--specifically, what internal mechanisms steering vectors affect and how this results in different model outputs. To investigate the causal mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of steering vectors, we conduct a comprehensive case study on refusal. We propose a multi-token activation patching framework and discover that different steering methodologies leverage functionally interchangeable circuits when applied at the same layer. These circuits reveal that steering vectors primarily interact with the attention mechanism through the OV circuit while largely ignoring the QK circuit. Freezing all attention scores during steering drops performance by only 8.83% across three model families. A mathematical decomposition of the steered OV circuit further reveals semantically interpretable concepts, even in cases where the steering vector itself does not. Leveraging the activation patching results, we show that steering vectors can be sparsified by up to 85-96% while retaining most performance, and that different steering methodologies agree on a subset of important dimensions.

Sources

Related papers