Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Formalizing Latent Thoughts: Four Axioms of Thought Representation in LLMs

Summary

Researchers introduce an axiomatic evaluation framework for latent thought representations in LLMs, defining four axioms (Causality, Minimality, Separability, Stability) with quantitative metrics independent of downstream accuracy. Auditing 23 reasoning tasks, they find no candidate satisfies all axioms, representations cannot distinguish questions within the same task, and encode little beyond input embeddings. The failure persists across model families, indicating a structural gap.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Fahd Seddik, Fatemeh Fard
Formalizing Latent Thoughts: Four Axioms of Thought Representation in LLMs
Report an error

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

Correction instructions
Read article

[2606.27378] Formalizing Latent Thoughts: Four Axioms of Thought Representation in LLMs

[Submitted on 7 May 2026]

Title:Formalizing Latent Thoughts: Four Axioms of Thought Representation in LLMs

View a PDF of the paper titled Formalizing Latent Thoughts: Four Axioms of Thought Representation in LLMs, by Fahd Seddik and Fatemeh Fard

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:We introduce an axiomatic evaluation framework for latent thought representations in LLMs, comprising metrics that are independent of downstream benchmark scores and reveal representational failures that benchmark accuracy masks. Existing evaluations conflate representation quality with model capacity. Therefore, failures cannot be attributed to the representation rather than to the model that processes it. We formalize four functional axioms (Causality, Minimality, Separability, and Stability) and define a quantitative measure for each, computed directly on the representation independently of downstream accuracy. We audit open-weight LLMs across 23 reasoning tasks (e.g., Spatial Reasoning, Factual QA). We find that no candidate satisfies all four axioms simultaneously, that the representations distinguish task type reliably but cannot distinguish between two questions within the same task, and that the representations encode little information beyond what is already present in the input embedding. The failure is consistent across dense, reasoning-distilled, and RL-trained model families, indicating that the gap is structural rather than a property of model size or training procedure.

Comments: 44 pages, 27 tables, 14 figures

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

Cite as: arXiv:2606.27378 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2606.27378v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.27378

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Fahd Seddik [view email] [v1] Thu, 7 May 2026 04:04:25 UTC (661 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Formalizing Latent Thoughts: Four Axioms of Thought Representation in LLMs, by Fahd Seddik and Fatemeh Fard

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-06

Change to browse by:

cs cs.LG

References & Citations

NASA ADS

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

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • Four axioms proposed: Causality, Minimality, Separability, Stability for evaluating LLM latent thought representations.
  • Evaluation independent of downstream accuracy reveals representation failures masked by benchmark scores.
  • Audit across 23 reasoning tasks finds no representation satisfies all axioms; representations fail to distinguish different questions within the same task.
  • Failure consistent across dense, reasoning-distilled, and RL-trained models, suggesting a structural limitation.

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