When Probing Accuracy Saturates, Fragility Resolves: A Complementary Metric for LLM Pre-Training Analysis
Quick Answer
The paper introduces 'fragility' as a complementary metric to probe accuracy in LLM pre-training, revealing insights into model structure that standard probing misses.
Quick Take
The paper introduces 'fragility' as a complementary metric to probe accuracy in LLM pre-training, revealing insights into model structure that standard probing misses. It shows that while probe accuracy saturates early, fragility captures evolving representation characteristics, indicating deeper compositional encoding and robustness across training stages.
Key Points
- Fragility measures activation-noise levels where probe accuracy collapses, revealing hidden model dynamics.
- It captures evolving representation characteristics beyond the saturation point of probe accuracy.
- The study shows a gradient of moral representation emergence from lexical to compositional forms.
- Distinct fragility fingerprints indicate data curation impacts probe robustness without altering accuracy.
- Layer-depth robustness increases monotonically during training, contrasting with flat accuracy readings.
Paper Resources
Article Content
From source RSS / original summaryarXiv:2606. 11375v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard linear probing declares a property "encoded" when a classifier on hidden states achieves high accuracy. The protocol works well on a snapshot but breaks across pre-training: probe accuracy saturates within the first few thousand steps, leaving most of training invisible to the instrument. We introduce fragility, a complementary per-layer metric defined as the activation-noise level at which probe accuracy collapses.
Fragility is sensitive to both the margin of separability and the redundancy of representation, both of which keep evolving long after accuracy plateaus. Applied to open-checkpoint language models, fragility recovers structure that accuracy alone cannot see. Moralized representations emerge along a lexical $\to$ compositional gradient: lexical moral detection first, compositional moral encoding later.
Because probe accuracy on its own tracks how lexically separable a dataset is, we establish the compositional encoding directly, by showing it transfers across construction types that share no contrast tokens. A layer-depth robustness gradient develops monotonically across training while accuracy stays flat. And matched fine-tuning corpora that produce identical probing accuracy leave distinct fragility fingerprints, showing that data curation reshapes probe robustness without changing probe accuracy.
In every comparison we test, where probing accuracy returns a flat answer, fragility returns a structured one.
Reader Mode unavailable (could not extract clean content).
Want this in your inbox every morning?
Daily brief at your local 8am — bilingual EN/中文, free.
More from arXiv cs.CL
See more →Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents?
The REFLECT benchmark reveals that current LLM judges are unreliable, achieving below 55% accuracy in evaluating reasoning and evidence use, highlighting the need for improved evaluation methods for deep research agents.