Source
Marks et al. (2025), LIT-1532, read in full in NOTE-1187: §3.3 and Figure 4, §5 and Figure 5, and Appendix C (Figures 7–18, from captions and text).
What is asserted
That behaviours are typically unions of mechanisms at the feature level, so that a behaviour’s “circuit” is an arrangement of pathways rather than one chain. The authors make the point of their two clusters, and their agreement circuits have the same shape.
What the record holds toward it
- Agreement across a relative clause (Pythia-70M, 86 nodes; Gemma-2-2B, 223 nodes; faithfulness 0.21 each): a direct pathway from subject-number features to verb-form features, and a second that moves the number to the end of the clause through boundary detectors; Gemma adds noun-phrase number trackers.
- “To” as an infinitival object (cluster 475, Pythia-70M): two mechanisms, one on verbs, participles and predicate adjectives that take infinitival objects, one on nominal objects before an object complement, which “both influence the output in layer 5 without fully intersecting”.
- Incrementing sequences (cluster 382): general succession features in layer-3 attention and narrow induction features for specific tokens, composing into a layer-5 feature that increments “3” to “4”.
- Against or qualifying. The circuits are small, chosen at thresholds that keep annotation manageable, and the agreement circuits recover only 0.21 of the behaviour. No pathway was ablated on its own. The annotations are the authors’.
What it would take
See promote_when.
Connections
- CLAIM-454. If behaviours are unions of feature pathways, then what does the work is an organization of features, which is the claim’s thesis transposed to a network.
- QUESTION-275. A developmental account would have to track pathways, not features: whether the two agreement pathways form together or one after the other.
- THEORY-973. Induction at feature level comes in token-specific pieces composed with succession, where Olsson et al. found heads.