Evaluating Steering Techniques using Human Similarity Judgments

Fuente: arXiv
Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Studdiford, Zach, Rogers, Timothy T., Suresh, Siddharth, Mukherjee, Kushin
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2025
Soggetti:
Accesso online:
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866908379092353024
author Studdiford, Zach
Rogers, Timothy T.
Suresh, Siddharth
Mukherjee, Kushin
author_facet Studdiford, Zach
Rogers, Timothy T.
Suresh, Siddharth
Mukherjee, Kushin
contents Current evaluations of Large Language Model (LLM) steering techniques focus on task-specific performance, overlooking how well steered representations align with human cognition. Using a well-established triadic similarity judgment task, we assessed steered LLMs on their ability to flexibly judge similarity between concepts based on size or kind. We found that prompt-based steering methods outperformed other methods both in terms of steering accuracy and model-to-human alignment. We also found LLMs were biased towards 'kind' similarity and struggled with 'size' alignment. This evaluation approach, grounded in human cognition, adds further support to the efficacy of prompt-based steering and reveals privileged representational axes in LLMs prior to steering.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2505_19333
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Evaluating Steering Techniques using Human Similarity Judgments
Studdiford, Zach
Rogers, Timothy T.
Suresh, Siddharth
Mukherjee, Kushin
Artificial Intelligence
I.2.7
Current evaluations of Large Language Model (LLM) steering techniques focus on task-specific performance, overlooking how well steered representations align with human cognition. Using a well-established triadic similarity judgment task, we assessed steered LLMs on their ability to flexibly judge similarity between concepts based on size or kind. We found that prompt-based steering methods outperformed other methods both in terms of steering accuracy and model-to-human alignment. We also found LLMs were biased towards 'kind' similarity and struggled with 'size' alignment. This evaluation approach, grounded in human cognition, adds further support to the efficacy of prompt-based steering and reveals privileged representational axes in LLMs prior to steering.
title Evaluating Steering Techniques using Human Similarity Judgments
topic Artificial Intelligence
I.2.7
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.19333