Paper detail

Layer-Order Inversion: Rethinking Latent Multi-Hop Reasoning in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) perform well on multi-hop reasoning, yet how they internally compose multiple facts remains unclear. Recent work proposes \emph{hop-aligned circuit hypothesis}, suggesting that bridge entities are computed sequentially across layers before later-hop answers. Through systematic analyses on real-world multi-hop queries, we show that this hop-aligned assumption does not generalize: later-hop answer entities can become decodable earlier than bridge entities, a phenomenon we call \emph{layer-order inversion}, which strengthens with total hops. To explain this behavior, we propose a \emph{probabilistic recall-and-extract} framework that models multi-hop reasoning as broad probabilistic recall in shallow MLP layers followed by selective extraction in deeper attention layers. This framework is empirically validated through systematic probing analyses, reinterpreting prior layer-wise decoding evidence, explaining chain-of-thought gains, and providing a mechanistic diagnosis of multi-hop failures despite correct single-hop knowledge. Code is available at https://github.com/laquabe/Layer-Order-Inversion.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.