Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Rules Amortize, Pairings Don't: Linguistic Structure Determines What Latent Task Representations Can Replace In-Context Learning

In-context learning (ICL) can be amortized into latent objects (task vectors, function vectors, context vectors) that recover few-shot behavior at zero-shot inference cost, but recent theory shows a static vector acts as a single synthetic demonstration and must fail on high-rank mappings such as word-level bijections. We ask a linguistic version of this question: which linguistic operations can be amortized out of the prompt? We train a 2.6M-parameter network that reads the geometry of a few-shot support set (centroid, principal subspace, spectrum, computed once and cached) and produces an input-conditioned additive update to the query's residual stream at a mid-depth layer of a frozen G...

AuthorsGunmay Jhingran
Primary categorycs.CL
Published30 September 2026
Last updated at source30 September 2026
cs.CLcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/849a702b-de34-4b23-9267-c2e18f2669df" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.