Skip to content

SPARK: Susceptibility-Guided Profiling and Steering of Latent Reasoning States in Large Language Models

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.10296 · 0 citations · 44 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

SPARK is introduced, which uses hidden-state response to diagnose whether a model internally enters an effective reasoning state and to guide lightweight test-time steering, and suggests that susceptibility can serve not only as a diagnostic signal for reasoning failures, but also as a practical guide for targeted test-time intervention.

Abstract

Reasoning failures in large language models (LLMs) are usually evaluated from final answers, but a wrong answer does not reveal why the model failed. The same incorrect output may reflect missing capability, an unstable reasoning trajectory, or a failure to activate a reasoning state that is already available in the frozen model. Existing prompting and benchmark-based evaluation methods mostly operate at the output level, while generic activation-steering methods typically apply global directions without diagnosing which examples require intervention. In this paper, we introduce SPARK, which uses hidden-state response to diagnose whether a model internally enters an effective reasoning state and to guide lightweight test-time steering. The key observation is that raw hidden-state susceptibility is strongly confounded by prompt length, especially in programmatic and algorithmic reasoning where harder serialized instances naturally become longer. SPARK therefore uses length-controlled susceptibility to separate input-scale effects from residual reasoning activation, and combines this signal with cross-layer coordination to select reasoning-active anchors and under-activated hard examples. We use FRONTIER-4.5K as a controlled programmatic reasoning suite for latent profiling and difficulty-aware analysis, and evaluate SPARK-Steering on GSM8K and MATH-500 with forward-only benchmark profiling. Our method improves Qwen3 series models consistently; on MATH-500, accuracy rises from 82.0% to 84.6% for Qwen3-4B and from 82.4% to 85.6% for Qwen3-8B. These results suggest that susceptibility can serve not only as a diagnostic signal for reasoning failures, but also as a practical guide for targeted test-time intervention.

View source

Similar papers

Jul 2026

Can We Break LLMs Out of Self-Loops? Fine-Grained Reasoning Control with Activation Steering

This work treats each reasoning trace as a sequence of latent states rather than an unstructured texts, and investigates whether inference time interventions can provide fine-grained control over the self-looping reasoning process.

Sheldon Yu, Tong Yu, Xunyi Jiang et al. · 0 citations
#small language model Preprint Aug 2026

CritICL: Inference-Time Weak-to-Strong Generalization from Small Language Model Failure Modes

Experimental results show that CritICL consistently outperforms standard in-context learning and achieves performance competitive with or superior to test-time scaling methods, while requiring significantly fewer generations and lower token cost.

Yu-Fan Wu, Ying-Hui He, Zhengyi Hu et al. · 1 citation
2025

Evaluating the Inductive Abilities of Large Language Models: Why Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Sometimes Hurts More Than Helps

This work presents a theoretical framework that reveals how reasoning steps can amplify error through three failure modes: incorrect sub-task decomposition, incorrect sub-task solving, and incorrect final answer summarization, and introduces structured interventions that adapt CoT generation according to the identified...

Haibo Jin, Peiyan Zhang, Man Luo et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

Wrong Prediction, Right Answer: Recovering Evidence from Collapsed LLM Sequence Scores

This work introduces a diagnostic protocol using a minimal, target-label-free additive correction, showing that many apparent zero-shot reasoning deficits are expression failures masking intact internal logic, urging a narrower interpretation of benchmark evaluations.

Qi-Yao Yan, Chen-Peng Wang, Liang-Ming Pan · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.