The Objective Decides: When a Learned Dynamics Model Uses a Conserved Quantity

πŸ“… 2026-07-04
πŸ“ˆ Citations: 0
✨ Influential: 0
πŸ“„ PDF
πŸ€– AI Summary
While existing linear probes can decode conserved quantities with high accuracy, they cannot determine whether a dynamics model causally relies on them for predictions. This work introduces the concept of β€œcausal deployment,” combining single-step activation swapping, a causal effect metric (transfer-corr Ο„), and algebraic predicate analysis to systematically evaluate the causal role of conserved quantities in prediction. The study reveals that whether a model deploys conserved quantities depends on its training objective and is governed by the algebraic structure of its outputs; notably, even when probe RΒ² β‰ˆ 1, conserved quantities may remain causally inert. For the first time, the research demonstrates a strong correlation (r = +0.97) between deployment gaps and out-of-distribution (OOD) performance, validating this finding across diverse physical systems and a 158-million-parameter PDE foundation model.
πŸ“ Abstract
A linear probe that recovers a conserved quantity from a learned dynamics model's activations is routinely read as evidence that the model uses that quantity. We show this inference is unsound. Across mechanical, circuit, and partial-differential-equation (PDE) systems, and on a 158M-parameter pretrained PDE foundation model, energy and other invariants are linearly decodable at $R^2 \approx 1$ yet causally inert on next-state prediction: overwriting the decoded direction with a donor state's value (single-step activation interchange) leaves the forward pass essentially unchanged (transfer-corr $Ο„\approx 0$). The same direction in the same representation becomes causally load-bearing ($Ο„\to +1$) the moment the training objective rewards the invariant, so deployment is a property of the objective, not of the representation or the probe. We further show that when an invariant is deployed is governed by a precise algebraic predicate (its relation to the prediction output), by flipping a single invariant from inert to load-bearing by changing only the output's algebra. Finally, the gap has teeth: across models that all decode the target at $R^2 = 1.00$, the deployment gap forecasts out-of-distribution (OOD) accuracy ($r = +0.97$) where decodability is blind. We argue that causal deployment, not decodability, is what interpretability should measure when the question is whether a model uses a piece of knowledge, and we give a cheap instrument for measuring it.
Problem

Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.

conserved quantity
learned dynamics model
linear probe
causal deployment
interpretability
Innovation

Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.

causal deployment
linear probe
conserved quantity
activation interchange
out-of-distribution generalization
πŸ”Ž Similar Papers