aiqbench analysis
MENTIS introduces a geometry-first diagnostic framework that quantifies internal reorganization in language models during preference alignment, revealing that structural changes are selective rather than uniform. The study demonstrates that normative concepts exhibit larger torsion shifts than factual ones, with peak effects localizing to mid-to-late layers, indicating that behavior-level evaluations alone are insufficient for assessing alignment integrity. This approach provides measurable traces of post-training modifications in internal computation, offering a deeper understanding of how alignment reshapes latent representations beyond observable outputs.
MENTIS: What Belief Changes Under Alignment? Measuring Multi-Scale Latent Torsion in Language Models
arXiv:2606.01060v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Preference alignment has substantially improved the observable behavior of large language models, yet it remains unclear what alignment changes internally. Aligned systems still fail under jailbreaks, prompt injection, and retrieval-time corruption, suggesting behavior-level evaluation alone is incomplete. Post-training should leave measurable traces in internal computation. We ask: when an instruction-tuned (IT) model becomes a preference-aligned (PA) model, what geometric structure changes, where do those changes concentrate, and how selectively do they vary across concepts, prompts, and model families? We introduce MENTIS, a geometry-first framework for measuring alignment-induced internal reorganization in paired checkpoints. MENTIS compares IT and PA models using a primary layerwise covariance-based torsion norm (T1), a secondary spectral torsion diagnostic (T2), and an Energy-Radiance-Activation measure (ERA) for depth localization. Across four 7-8B model pairs on LITMUS, our study reveals that alignment-induced change is selective rather than uniform: normative concepts exhibit larger torsion shifts than factual concepts on average; torsion is negatively correlated with contextual entropy; and peak effects localize to architecture-specific mid-to-late layers. The same pattern appears across word-level, prompt-level, and model-level analyses. These results suggest preference alignment leaves structured, depth-localized geometric signatures in internal computation beyond what behavior-level evaluation alone can reveal.
Title:MENTIS: What Belief Changes Under Alignment? Measuring Multi-Scale Latent Torsion in Language Models
Abstract:Preference alignment has substantially improved the observable behavior of large language models, yet it remains unclear what alignment changes internally. Aligned systems still fail under jailbreaks, prompt injection, and retrieval-time corruption, suggesting behavior-level evaluation alone is incomplete. Post-training should leave measurable traces in internal computation. We ask: when an instruction-tuned (IT) model becomes a preference-aligned (PA) model, what geometric structure changes, where do those changes concentrate, and how selectively do they vary across concepts, prompts, and model families? We introduce MENTIS, a geometry-first framework for measuring alignment-induced internal reorganization in paired checkpoints. MENTIS compares IT and PA models using a primary layerwise covariance-based torsion norm (T1), a secondary spectral torsion diagnostic (T2), and an Energy-Radiance-Activation measure (ERA) for depth localization. Across four 7-8B model pairs on LITMUS, our study reveals that alignment-induced change is selective rather than uniform: normative concepts exhibit larger torsion shifts than factual concepts on average; torsion is negatively correlated with contextual entropy; and peak effects localize to architecture-specific mid-to-late layers. The same pattern appears across word-level, prompt-level, and model-level analyses. These results suggest preference alignment leaves structured, depth-localized geometric signatures in internal computation beyond what behavior-level evaluation alone can reveal.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2606.01060 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2606.01060v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.01060 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 306 words
Related coverage

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 3, 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · Oct 2, 2026

Would We See It Coming? Preference Falsification Cascades in Multi-Agent Systems
LessWrong · Aug 4, 2026

Why do models task game?
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 6, 2026