We present SDialog, an MIT-licensed open-source Python toolkit that unifies dialog generation, evaluation and mechanistic interpretability into a single end-to-end framework for building and analyzing LLM-based conversational agents. Built around a standardized \texttt{Dialog} representation, SDialog provides: (1) persona-driven multi-agent simulation with composable orchestration for controlled, synthetic dialog generation, (2) comprehensive evaluation combining linguistic metrics, LLM-as-a-judge and functional correctness validators, (3) mechanistic interpretability tools for activation inspection and steering via feature ablation and induction, and (4) audio generation with full acoustic simulation including 3D room modeling and microphone effects. The toolkit integrates with all major LLM backends, enabling mixed-backend experiments under a unified API. By coupling generation, evaluation, and interpretability in a dialog-centric architecture, SDialog enables researchers to build, benchmark and understand conversational systems more systematically.

Diffusion models have achieved remarkable performance in generative modeling, yet their theoretical foundations are often intricate, and the gap between mathematical formulations in papers and practical open-source implementations can be difficult to bridge. Existing tutorials primarily focus on deriving equations, offering limited guidance on how diffusion models actually operate in code. To address this, we present a concise implementation of approximately 300 lines that explains diffusion models from a code-execution perspective. Our minimal example preserves the essential components -- including forward diffusion, reverse sampling, the noise-prediction network, and the training loop -- while removing unnecessary engineering details. This technical report aims to provide researchers with a clear, implementation-first understanding of how diffusion models work in practice and how code and theory correspond. Our code and pre-trained models are available at: this https URL.

Transformers and more specifically decoder-only transformers dominate modern LLM architectures. While they have shown to work exceptionally well, they are not without issues, resulting in surprising failure modes and predictably asymmetric performance degradation. This article is a study of many of these observed failure modes of transformers through the lens of graph neural network (GNN) theory. We first make the case that much of deep learning, including transformers, is about learnable information mixing and propagation. This makes the study of model failure modes a study of bottlenecks in information propagation. This naturally leads to GNN theory, where there is already a rich literature on information propagation bottlenecks and theoretical failure modes of models. We then make the case that many issues faced by GNNs are also experienced by transformers. In addition, we analyze how the causal nature of decoder-only transformers create interesting geometric properties in information propagation, resulting in predictable and potentially devastating failure modes. Finally, we observe that existing solutions in transformer research tend to be ad-hoc and driven by intuition rather than grounded theoretical motivation. As such, we unify many such solutions under a more theoretical perspective, providing insight into why they work, what problem they are actually solving, and how they can be further improved to target specific failure modes of transformers. Overall, this article is an attempt to bridge the gap between observed failure modes in transformers and a general lack of theoretical understanding of them in this space.

Training vision language models (VLMs) aims to align visual representations from a vision encoder with the textual representations of a pretrained large language model (LLM). However, many VLMs exhibit reduced factual recall performance compared to their LLM backbones, raising the question of how effective multimodal fine-tuning is at extending existing mechanisms within the LLM to visual inputs. We argue that factual recall based on visual inputs requires VLMs to solve a two-hop problem: (1) forming entity representations from visual inputs, and (2) recalling associated factual knowledge based on these entity representations. By benchmarking 14 VLMs with various architectures (LLaVA, Native, Cross-Attention), sizes (7B-124B parameters), and training setups on factual recall tasks against their original LLM backbone models, we find that 11 of 14 models exhibit factual recall degradation. We select three models with high and two models with low performance degradation, and use attribution patching, activation patching, and probing to show that degraded VLMs struggle to use the existing factual recall circuit of their LLM backbone, because they resolve the first hop too late in the computation. In contrast, high-performing VLMs resolve entity representations early enough to reuse the existing factual recall mechanism. Finally, we demonstrate two methods to recover performance: patching entity representations from the LLM backbone into the VLM, and prompting with chain-of-thought reasoning. Our results highlight that the speed of early entity resolution critically determines how effective VLMs are in using preexisting LLM mechanisms. More broadly, our work illustrates how mechanistic analysis can explain and unveil systematic failures in multimodal alignment.

Large language models (LLMs) can reliably distinguish grammatical from ungrammatical sentences, but how grammatical knowledge is represented within the models remains an open question. We investigate whether different syntactic phenomena recruit shared or distinct components in LLMs. Using a functional localization approach inspired by cognitive neuroscience, we identify the LLM units most responsive to 67 English syntactic phenomena in seven open-weight models. These units are consistently recruited across sentences containing the phenomena and causally support the models' syntactic performance. Critically, different types of syntactic agreement (e.g., subject-verb, anaphor, determiner-noun) recruit overlapping sets of units, suggesting that agreement constitutes a meaningful functional category for LLMs. This pattern holds in English, Russian, and Chinese; and further, in a cross-lingual analysis of 57 diverse languages, structurally more similar languages share more units for subject-verb agreement. Taken together, these findings reveal that syntactic agreement-a critical marker of syntactic dependencies-constitutes a meaningful category within LLMs' representational spaces.