How should we evaluate the quality of generative models? Many existing metrics focus on a model's producibility, i.e. the quality and breadth of outputs it can generate. However, the actual value from using a generative model stems not just from what it can produce but whether a user with a specific goal can produce an output that satisfies that goal. We refer to this property as steerability. In this paper, we first introduce a mathematical decomposition for quantifying steerability independently from producibility.

Techniques that learn improved representations via offline data or self-supervised objectives have shown impressive results in traditional reinforcement learning.Nevertheless, it is unclear how improved representation learning can benefit reinforcement learning from human feedback on language models.In this work, we propose training reward models (RMs) in a contrastive, $\textit{goal-conditioned}$ fashion by increasing the representation similarity of future states along sampled preferred trajectories and decreasing the similarity along randomly sampled dispreferred trajectories.This objective significantly improves reward model performance by up to 0.09 AUROC across challenging benchmarks, such as MATH and GSM8k. These findings extend to general alignment as well -- on the Helpful-Harmless dataset, we observe 2.3\% increase in accuracy.Beyond improving reward model performance, we show this way of training RM representations enables improved steerability because it allows us to evaluate the likelihood of an action achieving a particular goal-state (e.g.

To move away from open-heart surgery towards safer transcatheter procedures, there is a growing need for improved imaging techniques and robotic solutions to enable simple, accurate tool navigation. Common imaging modalities, such as fluoroscopy and ultrasound, have limitations that can be overcome using cardioscopy, i.e., direct optical visualization inside the beating heart. We present a cardioscope designed as a steerable balloon. As a balloon, it can be collapsed to pass through the vasculature and subsequently inflated inside the heart for visualization and tool delivery through an integrated working channel. Through careful design of balloon wall thickness, a single input, balloon inflation pressure, is used to independently control two outputs, balloon diameter (corresponding to field of view diameter) and balloon bending angle (enabling precise working channel positioning). This balloon technology can be tuned to produce cardioscopes designed for a range of intracardiac tasks. To illustrate this approach, a balloon design is presented for the specific task of aortic leaflet laceration. Image-based closed-loop control of bending angle is also demonstrated as a means of enabling stable orientation control during tool insertion and removal.

As large language models (LLMs) are deployed globally, creating pluralistic systems that can accommodate the diverse preferences and values of users worldwide becomes essential. We introduce EVALUESTEER, a benchmark to measure LLMs' and reward models' (RMs) steerability towards users' value and stylistic preference profiles grounded in psychology and human-LLM interaction literature. To address the gap in existing datasets that do not support controlled evaluations of RM steering, we synthetically generated 165,888 preference pairs -- systematically varying pairs along 4 value dimensions (traditional, secular-rational, survival, and self-expression) and 4 style dimensions (verbosity, readability, confidence, and warmth). We use EVALUESTEER to evaluate whether, given a user profile and a pair of candidate value-laden and style-laden responses, LLMs and RMs are able to select the output that aligns with the user's preferences. We evaluate six open-source and proprietary LLMs and RMs under eleven systematic prompting conditions and six preference comparison scenarios. Notably, our results show that, when given the user's full profile of values and stylistic preferences, the best models achieve <75% accuracy at choosing the correct response, in contrast to >99% accuracy when only relevant style and value preferences are provided. EVALUESTEER thus highlights the limitations of current RMs at identifying and adapting to relevant user profile information, and provides a challenging testbed for developing RMs that can be steered towards diverse human values and preferences.

However, the reliability and generalisation properties of this approach are unknown.

Navigating dilemmas involving conflicting values is challenging even for humans in high-stakes domains, let alone for AI, yet prior work has been limited to everyday scenarios. To close this gap, we introduce CLASH (Character perspective-based LLM Assessments in Situations with High-stakes), a meticulously curated dataset consisting of 345 high-impact dilemmas along with 3,795 individual perspectives of diverse values. CLASH enables the study of critical yet underex-plored aspects of value-based decision-making processes, including understanding of decision ambivalence and psychological discomfort as well as capturing the temporal shifts of values in the perspectives of characters. By benchmarking 14 non-thinking and thinking models, we uncover several key findings. Instead, new failure patterns emerge, including early commitment and overcom-mitment. This paper aims to address a core question: Can LLMs make proper judgments in high-stakes dilemmas according to different perspectives?

Language models can be steered by modifying their internal representations to control concepts such as emotion, style, or truthfulness in generation. However, the conditions for an effective intervention remain unclear and are often validated through heuristics and trial-and-error. To fill this gap, we demonstrate that intervention efficacy, measured by linear steerability (i.e., the ability to adjust output via linear transformations of hidden states), emerges during intermediate stages of training. Moreover, even closely related concepts (e.g., anger and sadness) exhibit steerability emergence at distinct stages of training. To better interpret the dynamics of steerability during training, we adapt existing intervention techniques into a unified framework, referred to as the "Intervention Detector" (ID), which is designed to reveal how linear steerability evolves over the course of training through hidden state and representation analysis. ID reveals that concepts become increasingly linearly separable in the hidden space as training progresses, which strongly correlates with the emergence of linear steerability. We further introduce ID-based metrics, such as heatmaps, entropy trends, and cosine similarity, to help interpret how linear steerability evolves throughout training. In addition, we apply ID across different model families to ensure the generality of our findings on steerability dynamics.

Techniques that learn improved representations via offline data or self-supervised objectives have shown impressive results in traditional reinforcement learning.Nevertheless, it is unclear how improved representation learning can benefit reinforcement learning from human feedback on language models.In this work, we propose training reward models (RMs) in a contrastive, \textit{goal-conditioned} fashion by increasing the representation similarity of future states along sampled preferred trajectories and decreasing the similarity along randomly sampled dispreferred trajectories.This objective significantly improves reward model performance by up to 0.09 AUROC across challenging benchmarks, such as MATH and GSM8k. These findings extend to general alignment as well -- on the Helpful-Harmless dataset, we observe 2.3\% increase in accuracy.Beyond improving reward model performance, we show this way of training RM representations enables improved steerability because it allows us to evaluate the likelihood of an action achieving a particular goal-state (e.g.

While vision models are highly capable, their internal mechanisms remain poorly understood -- a challenge which sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have helped address in language, but which remains underexplored in vision. We address this gap by training SAEs on CLIP's vision transformer and uncover key differences between vision and language processing, including distinct sparsity patterns for SAEs trained across layers and token types. We then provide the first systematic analysis on the steerability of CLIP's vision transformer by introducing metrics to quantify how precisely SAE features can be steered to affect the model's output. We find that 10-15\% of neurons and features are steerable, with SAEs providing thousands more steerable features than the base model. Through targeted suppression of SAE features, we then demonstrate improved performance on three vision disentanglement tasks (CelebA, Waterbirds, and typographic attacks), finding optimal disentanglement in middle model layers, and achieving state-of-the-art performance on defense against typographic attacks.