Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Circuit Oracle: Automating Attribution Graph Analysis via Natural-Language Queries

Summary

Circuit Oracle is an off-the-shelf LLM with a multi-agent harness and task-specific authored skills that reads attribution graphs through tool calls to answer natural-language questions about a target model. Across three safety-relevant proxy tasks, results are mixed: it reaches 78.2±2.4% accuracy on spurious-feature detection, outperforming single-layer baselines, but trails trained self-explainers like Activation Oracles on secret elicitation and only beats a diff-in-means baseline on refusal suppression when allowed the best of five attempts.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Shariar Kabir, Hong Kiat Tan, Swastik Agrawal, Sai V R Chereddy, Sriram Balasubramanian
Circuit Oracle: Automating Attribution Graph Analysis via Natural-Language Queries
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 30 Oct 2026]

Title:Circuit Oracle: Automating Attribution Graph Analysis via Natural-Language Queries

View a PDF of the paper titled Circuit Oracle: Automating Attribution Graph Analysis via Natural-Language Queries, by Shariar Kabir and 4 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Attribution graphs, an emerging tool in mechanistic interpretability, use transcoders to decompose language model computations into sparse interpretable features connected by causal edges. However, turning a graph into a safety-relevant insight requires hours of manual analysis by experts. We introduce Circuit Oracle, an off-the-shelf LLM equipped with a multi-agent harness and task-specific authored skills, which answers natural-language questions about a target model by reading the attribution graph through tool calls. We evaluate it on three safety-relevant proxy tasks: detecting spurious features in probe circuits, eliciting hidden knowledge from taboo-finetuned models, and suppression jailbreaking via feature-level interventions. Beyond task scores, the oracle produces pruned subgraphs and context-specific feature explanations that we assess qualitatively. Results are mixed. On spurious-feature detection, Circuit Oracle reaches 78.2 $\pm$ 2.4% accuracy, outperforming single-layer feature-ranking baselines. On secret elicitation, trained self-explainers like Activation Oracles remain the stronger baseline. On refusal suppression over 50 prompts, its single committed intervention is slightly below a diff-in-means baseline, and only exceeds it when allowed the best of five attempts. Results are stable across five runs and across model choices for the agents. We also release the pruned subgraphs and context-specific feature readings that revise existing global labels, and invite future work to develop evaluations that can measure their usefulness directly.

Comments: Extended version of a paper presented at the Mechanistic Interpretability and Compositional Learning workshops at ICML 2026

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

Cite as: arXiv:2611.00420 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2611.00420v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.00420

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Shariar Kabir [view email] [v1] Fri, 30 Oct 2026 22:12:53 UTC (1,335 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Circuit Oracle: Automating Attribution Graph Analysis via Natural-Language Queries, by Shariar Kabir and 4 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-11

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

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.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersIntermediate

Key points

  • Circuit Oracle combines a multi-agent harness with authored task skills to query attribution graphs via tool calls and answer natural-language questions about a target model.
  • It achieves 78.2±2.4% accuracy on spurious-feature detection, outperforming single-layer feature-ranking baselines.
  • On secret elicitation it is weaker than trained self-explainers such as Activation Oracles; on refusal suppression its single committed intervention is slightly below a diff-in-means baseline and only exceeds it when allowed the best of five attempts.
  • Results are stable across five runs and agent model choices; the authors release pruned subgraphs and context-specific feature readings that revise global labels, and invite evaluations that directly measure their usefulness.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.