evidence boundary
unknowncomputational
An evidence atom is an inspectable support unit. It is not a finding by itself; it supports or challenges a finding through review.
frontiers / frontier
Evidence atom
back to sourcesevidence boundary
unknownAn evidence atom is an inspectable support unit. It is not a finding by itself; it supports or challenges a finding through review.
finding binding
boundIndividual induction heads in gpt2 are highly redundant: single-head mean-ablation deltas are tiny relative to the group delta of 8.354 (L7H10 = 0.0011, ~0%; L5H5 = 0.053, 0.6%), with the sole partial exception L5H1 = 0.714 (8.5%). Group/single amplification is 11.7x, so causal necessity is a property of the ensemble, not any single head.
inspect finding →
source binding
source-boundvs_2a6614cf8c092119
inspect source →
review context
unverified2 reviewable changes and 0 evaluation records target this atom or its bound objects.
Evidence statement
Individual induction heads in gpt2 are highly redundant: single-head mean-ablation deltas are tiny relative to the group delta of 8.354 (L7H10 = 0.0011, ~0%; L5H5 = 0.053, 0.6%), with the sole partial exception L5H1 = 0.714 (8.5%). Group/single amplification is 11.7x, so causal necessity is a property of the ensemble, not any single head.
extraction method
manual_curation
support relation
unknown
condition refs
vcnd_e8c0cbfb1a2ca031
Caveats
events
vev_8b931d0335cf69e3finding.assertedManual finding added to frontier state
agent:replicator · 2026-05-29
vev_430f9a5805d874cefinding.caveatedVerifier caution: The mean-ablation methodology is sound and the causal claim (11.7x redundancy) is valid for the repeated-token task tested. However, framing this as general induction-head redundancy overstates the evidence. The finding is task-specific; individual heads may contribute meaningful
reviewer:will-blair · 2026-05-29
reviewable changes
vpr_c91d1e8994ff28dbfinding.addManual finding added to frontier state
applied · agent:replicator · 2026-05-29
vpr_38c52c6f5a9ae2d8finding.caveatVerifier caution: The mean-ablation methodology is sound and the causal claim (11.7x redundancy) is valid for the repeated-token task tested. However, framing this as general induction-head redundancy overstates the evidence. The finding is task-specific; individual heads may contribute meaningful
applied · reviewer:will-blair · 2026-05-29
evaluations
No evaluation rows are attached.