Read-Best Is Not Steer-Best: A Probing--Steering Layer Dissociation in Omni-Modal Large Language Models
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
arXiv:2609.22135 (cs)
[Submitted on 24 Aug 2026]
Title:Read-Best Is Not Steer-Best: A Probing--Steering Layer Dissociation in Omni-Modal Large Language Models
Authors:Yibo Wang, Jisheng Dang, Bimei Wang, Yitao Wu, Wencan Zhang, Hong Peng, Jizhao Liu, Bin Hu, Qi Tian, Tat-Seng Chua
View a PDF of the paper titled Read-Best Is Not Steer-Best: A Probing--Steering Layer Dissociation in Omni-Modal Large Language Models, by Yibo Wang and 9 other authors
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Omni-modal large language models integrate text, audio, and image signals into a shared residual stream, where concepts such as emotion can be linearly decoded and causally modified by activation steering. A common but rarely tested assumption is that the layer with the highest probing accuracy is also the best layer for steering, so injection layers are often selected by probe performance. We provide the first causal test of this assumption across three independently developed omni-modal models and find that it fails. Reading and intervention rely on different layers, a phenomenon we call the probing-steering layer dissociation. Using emotion as a controlled testbed, we measure layer-wise readability and steerability across text, audio, and image inputs. Probe-best layers vary widely across architectures, while steering-effective layers consistently fall within a narrow mid-to-late range of normalized depth. Paired random-direction controls show an approximately 26-fold causal gap, ruling out random perturbation and direction quality as explanations. Logit-lens analysis reveals a staged forward process: causal handle, probing saturation, and vocabulary commitment, and motivates a two-factor account in which steering effectiveness depends on both representational readability and downstream plasticity. These results show that probing accuracy is a poor heuristic for selecting intervention layers and suggest a cross-architecture mid-to-late selection criterion. We also identify a cross-modal emotion subspace organized by valence and arousal, with joy acting as a stable anchor across models. Code and data: this https URL.
| Comments: | 13 pages, 10 figures |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2609.22135 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2609.22135v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.22135
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
|
Full-text links:
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
View a PDF of the paper titled Read-Best Is Not Steer-Best: A Probing--Steering Layer Dissociation in Omni-Modal Large Language Models, by Yibo Wang and 9 other authors
References & Citations
Loading...
Bibliographic Tools
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Recommenders and Search Tools
Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.