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

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