
Large Language Models (LLMs) are impactful yet opaque artifacts. At their core, they are subsymbolic constructs defined by billions of numeric weights that interact in a largely inscrutable manner. Current analysis paradigms are either black-box benchmarks that test model performance on pre-defined tasks, or mechanistic interpretability approaches that trace back outputs to specific weights.Both analysis methods are limited by the experimenter's hypothesis space - one must know what to look for to find it. In this perspective, we argue for a third, radically different analysis paradigm: Epistemic Twins. We propose constructing large-scale symbolic approximations of LLMs in human-readable formats. This enables the comprehensive materialization of factual knowledge (or beliefs) inherent in the model without predefining hypotheses, facilitating large-scale analysis and auditing towards better understanding and explainability.
Knowledge Bases, Explainable AI, LLMs
Knowledge Bases, Explainable AI, LLMs
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
