Coverage, Not Difficulty, Sets How Much Synthetic Data an Activation Probe Needs
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:Coverage, Not Difficulty, Sets How Much Synthetic Data an Activation Probe Needs
Abstract:Activation probes that monitor deployed language models are trained on synthetic conversations, and how many a probe needs is open. We trace learning curves over 10-590 synthetic samples for three monitoring concepts, high-stakes situations, replies harmful to a person, and replies that do not follow the user's instruction, on fourteen held-out evaluation distributions and four probe models, varying the generator LLM and the prompt's detail. The need is set by what is monitored: probes for high-stakes and harmful are within a few hundredths of their plateau from 80 samples on Gemma-3-27B-IT, instruction probes need several times as many, and the ordering holds on three smaller probe models and on real samples (from dev set). Prior work advises spending a generation budget on breadth, more kinds of data, over depth, more of each kind. We read the depth a concept needs as the half-gain size of a fitted curve, the number of samples at which half the gain is in hand. Concept and distribution account for 42-45% of its variance, the generator, probe model, and prompt detail for under 10%. What sets the value of the half-gain size is coverage, not per-kind difficulty: the number of samples of its own kind a distribution needs to saturate. Every kind, one per evaluation distribution, has a median half-gain size of 7-11 own-kind synthetic samples under all three concepts alike. What differs is how far samples of one kind transfer to the concept's other kinds, almost fully under high-stakes, less under harmful, and least under instruction, which accounts for most of the gap between concepts on generated and real samples. Breadth therefore pays differently by concept: many kinds are necessary under instruction, where no kind covers another, and nearly redundant under high-stakes, where one kind covers the rest. We release the evaluation suites, dev sets, and generated sets.
| Comments: | 24 pages, 8 figures, 11 tables. Code and data: this https URL |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2610.10594 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2610.10594v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.10594
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
Additional Features
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
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.
More from arXiv — Machine Learning
-
Freeze the Decoder, Heal the Encoder: Parameter-Efficient Adaptation for SVD-Based KV-Cache Compression
Oct 9
-
SPERA: Spherical Prior EEG Foundation Model with Geometry- and Frequency-Aware Latent Prediction
Oct 9
-
Temporal transformer CAN encoder with federated lightweight heads for anomaly detection
Oct 9
-
When Routing Reveals Membership: Privacy Leakage from MoE Router Telemetry
Oct 9
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.