Papers › Analogical Reasoning Inside Large Language Models: Concept Vectors and the Limits of...

Analogical Reasoning Inside Large Language Models: Concept Vectors and the Limits of Abstraction

5 Mar 2025arXiv:2503.03666archive 2025-07-28

Gustaw Opiełka, Hannes Rosenbusch, Claire E. Stevenson

Analogical reasoning relies on conceptual abstractions, but it is unclear whether Large Language Models (LLMs) harbor such internal representations. We explore distilled representations from LLM activations and find that function vectors (FVs; Todd et al., 2024) - compact representations for in-context learning (ICL) tasks - are not invariant to simple input changes (e.g., open-ended vs. multiple-choice), suggesting they capture more than pure concepts. Using representational similarity analysis (RSA), we localize a small set of attention heads that encode invariant concept vectors (CVs) for verbal concepts like "antonym". These CVs function as feature detectors that operate independently of the final output - meaning that a model may form a correct internal representation yet still produce an incorrect output. Furthermore, CVs can be used to causally guide model behaviour. However, for more abstract concepts like "previous" and "next", we do not observe invariant linear representations, a finding we link to generalizability issues LLMs display within these domains.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

gucioopielka/concept_vectors officialmentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

In-Context LearningMultiple-choice

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

AttentionSETSoftmax

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections