IC-1576Base and aligned LLMs share 77.7% of top-1 token predictions, with distribution shifts concentrated in stylistic tokens rather than knowledge content

Report a problem with this record

Bill Yuchen Lin, Abhilasha Ravichander, Ximing Lu, Nouha Dziri, Melanie Sclar, Khyathi Chandu, Chandra Bhagavatula, Yejin Choi

SourceThe Unlocking Spell on Base LLMs: Rethinking Alignment via In-Context Learning

The paper decodes aligned LLM outputs and checks each token's rank in the base model's probability distribution. Across 1,000 examples, 77.7% of tokens are top-1 in both models (unshifted), 92.2% are within top-3, and only 7.8% are shifted (rank > 3). The shifted tokens are predominantly discourse markers, transitional phrases, and safety disclaimers (e.g., 'thank', 'hello', 'however', 'remember'), while knowledge-intensive tokens (e.g., 'chihuahua') appear at unshifted positions. This pattern holds across three model pairs: Llama-2-7b vs Llama-2-7b-chat, Llama-2-7b vs Vicuna-7b-v1.5, and Mistral-7b vs Mistral-7b-instruct, with shifted ratios of 7.8%, 4.8%, and 5.2% respectively.

Evidence
correlational
Key metric
77.7% unshifted, 14.5% marginal, 7.8% shifted (Llama-2-7b vs Llama-2-7b-chat); 82.4%/12.8%/4.8% (Llama-2-7b vs Vicuna-7b-v1.5); 82.2%/12.5%/5.2% (Mistral-7b vs Mistral-7b-instruct); 92.2% within top-3
Caveat
Analysis uses greedy decoding and different input templates for base vs aligned models (zero-shot template for base, official chat template for aligned), which may introduce some confound. The 1,000 examples come from Just-Eval-Instruct, a single evaluation set.
Model
Llama 2 / Llama 2 base Llama 2 7B, Llama 2 7B Chat / Llama-2-chat-7b, Mistral 7B / Mistral / Mistral 3 7B / Mistral-0.2-7B / Mistral-v0.1 Mistral-7B-Instruct, Vicuna Vicuna-7B-v1.5
Methods
KL Divergence [supporting]
Related work
LIMA [context]
Related findings
IC-1577
Extraction
automatic-extraction