Measuring Uncertainty in Transformer Circuits with Effective Information Consistency

Anatoly A. Krasnovsky
9/8/2025
cs.LGcs.AIcs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Mechanistic interpretability has identified functional subgraphs within large language models (LLMs), known as Transformer Circuits (TCs), that appear to implement specific algorithms. Yet we lack a formal, single-pass way to quantify when an active circuit is behaving coherently and thus likely trustworthy. Building on prior systems-theoretic proposals, we specialize a sheaf/cohomology and causal emergence perspective to TCs and introduce the Effective-Information Consistency Score (EICS). EICS combines (i) a normalized sheaf inconsistency computed from local Jacobians and activations, with (ii) a Gaussian EI proxy for circuit-level causal emergence derived from the same forward state. The construction is white-box, single-pass, and makes units explicit so that the score is dimensionless. We further provide practical guidance on score interpretation, computational overhead (with fast and exact modes), and a toy sanity-check analysis. Empirical validation on LLM tasks is deferred.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{krasnovsky2025measuring,
  title  = {Measuring Uncertainty in Transformer Circuits with Effective Information Consistency},
  author = {Anatoly A. Krasnovsky},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2509.07149},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07149v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2509.07149.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2509.07149)

Discussion