[2607.14111] Introspection Fine-Tuning (IFT): Training Small LLMs to Introspect
Abstract:Can small language models detect and report on perturbations their own internal activations? We investigate this question through the lens of activation steering: injecting concept vectors into a model's residual stream and measuring whether the model can accurately report on the perturbation. We first show that the binary detection paradigm used in prior work -- prompting the model to answer Yes'' or No'' to whether it detects an injected thought -- is confounded in small models, as steering biases the model toward affirmative responses regardless of the question content. We therefore propose two confound-free evaluation paradigms: sentence localization (identifying which of $N$ sentences was perturbed, chance $= 1/N$) and strength comparison (identifying which of two sentences received a stronger injection, chance $= 50\%$). Evaluating across six models from two families (Llama-3.2 and Gemma-4), we find that models as small as 2B parameters introspect reliably well above chance, and that introspective ability generally increases with scale. Llama-1B, however, performs at or below chance. We then introduce \emph{Introspection Fine-Tuning} (IFT): supervised fine-tuning on sentence-localization examples constructed from the model's own perturbed forward passes. IFT raises Llama-1B sentence-localization accuracy from $9.6\%$ to $60.6\%$ (a $6\times$ improvement), with gains generalizing zero-shot to the held-out strength-comparison task ($30.2\% \to 52.2\%$). IFT also improves introspection for 3B and 8B models, while inducing negligible degradation on standard capability benchmarks. Our results suggest that introspective ability is not fixed by scale alone: it can be directly trained, and doing so unlocks latent self-monitoring capacity with implications for AI transparency and alignment. Our code is \href{this https URL}{here}.
Abstract:Can small language models detect and report on perturbations their own internal activations? We investigate this question through the lens of activation steering: injecting concept vectors into a model's residual stream and measuring whether the model can accurately report on the perturbation. We first show that the binary detection paradigm used in prior work -- prompting the model to answer Yes'' or No'' to whether it detects an injected thought -- is confounded in small models, as steering biases the model toward affirmative responses regardless of the question content. We therefor
Explore this link on the map →related reading
- [2607.14111] Introspection Fine-Tuning (IFT): Training Small LLMs to Introspectarxiv.org
- Detecting the Disturbance: A Nuanced View of Introspective Abilities in LLMsarxiv.org
- Small Models Can Introspect, Toovgel.me
- [2604.16812] Introspection Adapters: Training LLMs to Report Their Learned Behaviorsarxiv.org
- Tracing the thoughts of a large language model \ Anthropicanthropic.com
- Introspection Adapters: Training LLMs to Report Their Learned Behaviorsarxiv.org
- Emergent Introspective Awareness in Large Language Modelstransformer-circuits.pub
- [2601.01828] Emergent Introspective Awareness in Large Language Modelsarxiv.org
- Transformer Circuits Threadtransformer-circuits.pub
- Emergent introspective awareness in large language models \ Anthropicanthropic.com
- [2410.13787] Looking Inward: Language Models Can Learn About Themselves by Introspectionarxiv.org
- [2601.01828] Emergent Introspective Awareness in Large Language Modelsarxiv.org