Papers
arxiv:2510.06182

Mixing Mechanisms: How Language Models Retrieve Bound Entities In-Context

Published on Oct 7
ยท Submitted by Yoav Gur Arieh on Oct 8
Authors:

Abstract

Language models use positional, lexical, and reflexive mechanisms to bind and retrieve entities, with a causal model achieving high accuracy in predicting next tokens across various tasks and input lengths.

AI-generated summary

A key component of in-context reasoning is the ability of language models (LMs) to bind entities for later retrieval. For example, an LM might represent "Ann loves pie" by binding "Ann" to "pie", allowing it to later retrieve "Ann" when asked "Who loves pie?" Prior research on short lists of bound entities found strong evidence that LMs implement such retrieval via a positional mechanism, where "Ann" is retrieved based on its position in context. In this work, we find that this mechanism generalizes poorly to more complex settings; as the number of bound entities in context increases, the positional mechanism becomes noisy and unreliable in middle positions. To compensate for this, we find that LMs supplement the positional mechanism with a lexical mechanism (retrieving "Ann" using its bound counterpart "pie") and a reflexive mechanism (retrieving "Ann" through a direct pointer). Through extensive experiments on nine models and ten binding tasks, we uncover a consistent pattern in how LMs mix these mechanisms to drive model behavior. We leverage these insights to develop a causal model combining all three mechanisms that estimates next token distributions with 95% agreement. Finally, we show that our model generalizes to substantially longer inputs of open-ended text interleaved with entity groups, further demonstrating the robustness of our findings in more natural settings. Overall, our study establishes a more complete picture of how LMs bind and retrieve entities in-context.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter

Entity binding in LMs is crucial for reasoning. Prior work established a positional mechanism underlying binding, yet it breaks down in complex settings. We find two additional mechanisms, lexical and reflexive, that drive model behavior.

๐Ÿ“„ https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.06182
๐Ÿ’ป https://github.com/yoavgur/mixing-mechs
๐ŸŒ https://yoav.ml/blog/2025/mixing-mechs/#interactive

This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.

The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API

Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!

If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space

You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2510.06182 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2510.06182 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2510.06182 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.