Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Computational analysis reveals resolution limits in neural circuit discovery across language models, indicating frame dependence collapses are artifacts of circuit size.
Measures whether a circuit discovered on a diverse set of sentence frames remains faithful on frames it was not discovered on, and finds the question cannot be answered at the resolution standard top-k discovery provides. Across four task families on Llama-3.2-3B and Pythia-1.4B, transfer penalties are near zero, but planting a known perturbation shows that swapping one head of ten moves faithfulness by 0.03-0.51 - more than any observed penalty. The minimum detectable effect is a two-to-five head circuit difference. Seven of eleven penalties are negative, a property of the selection procedure rather than of frames. Faithfulness rises monotonically with circuit size, reaching 1.198 at twenty heads where ten give 0.390, so a previously published 0.663 to 0.228 collapse records a circuit-size artifact rather than frame dependence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
J. Melton (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: