Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) can memorize and reproduce training sequences verbatim -- a tendency that undermines both generalization and privacy. Existing mitigation methods apply interventions uniformly, degrading performance on the majority of tokens that generalize normally. We show empirically that memorization is sparse, intermittent, and token-conditioned, suggesting that effective mitigation requires context-aware intervention rather than static parameter modification. To this end, we propose a novel and effective selective memorization mitigation method -- Gated Subspace Steering (GSS), which decomposes intervention into a probe (detecting memorization-relevant activations) and a steer (applying targeted correction only when the probe exceeds a threshold). The optimal probe-steer pair emerges from a principled optimization framework based on optimal subspace steering. Experiments on four benchmarks show GSS matches or exceeds state-of-the-art memorization reduction while requiring $100-1000 \times$ less compute than optimization-based alternatives. Furthermore, we provide new theoretical insights into the geometry of memorization in neural representations.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as simulated participants in social science experiments, but their behavior is often unstable and highly sensitive to design choices. Prior evaluations frequently conflate base-model capabilities with experimental instantiation, obscuring whether outcomes reflect the model itself or the agent setup. We instead frame participant simulation as an agent-design problem over full experimental protocols, where an agent is defined by a base model and a specification (e.g., participant attributes) that encodes behavioral assumptions. We introduce HUMANSTUDY-BENCH, a benchmark and execution engine that orchestrates LLM-based agents to reconstruct published human-subject experiments via a Filter--Extract--Execute--Evaluate pipeline, replaying trial sequences and running the original analysis pipeline in a shared runtime that preserves the original statistical procedures end to end. To evaluate fidelity at the level of scientific inference, we propose new metrics to quantify how much human and agent behaviors agree. We instantiate 12 foundational studies as an initial suite in this dynamic benchmark, spanning individual cognition, strategic interaction, and social psychology, and covering more than 6,000 trials with human samples ranging from tens to over 2,100 participants.