Probing Transformer Representations Layer by Layer, Module by Module
Abstract
Jointly selecting layers and modules in transformer foundation models yields better probing features than depth-only or final-layer approaches, and simple fixed strategies recover much of the gain.
Which representation should be probed in a transformer-based foundation model? Recent work shows that the standard practice of probing the final layer is often suboptimal, as intermediate layers can provide better features. Yet, representations are still largely studied along depth alone, treating each transformer block as an atomic unit. In this work, we analyze transformer representations layer by layer, module by module. Through more than 144,000 linear probing evaluations of vision foundation models (VFMs) and large language models (LLMs), we show that layer and module choices should be considered jointly: the best layer-module pair yields substantially larger gains over the final-layer residual stream than the best layer with the residual stream fixed. Moreover, module performance can vary substantially across layers, showing that useful representations cannot be characterized by depth alone. Building on these findings, we evaluate simple fixed probing strategies: the final-layer feedforward activation (Act@100) for vision and the second normalization layer at 60% depth (LN2@60) for language. These strategies improve over the probing baseline in a majority of evaluations and recover, on average, 42% and 86% of the gains from probing the best layer-module pair for vision and language, respectively. For VFMs, these gains increase with the transfer difficulty between pretraining and downstream data.
Community
Which representation should be probed in a transformer-based foundation model? Recent work shows that the standard practice of probing the final layer is often suboptimal, as intermediate layers can provide better features. Yet, representations are still largely studied along depth alone, treating each transformer block as an atomic unit. In this work, we analyze transformer representations layer by layer, module by module. Through more than 144,000 linear probing evaluations of vision foundation models (VFMs) and large language models (LLMs), we show that layer and module choices should be considered jointly: the best layer-module pair yields substantially larger gains over the final-layer residual stream than the best layer with the residual stream fixed. Moreover, module performance can vary substantially across layers, showing that useful representations cannot be characterized by depth alone. Building on these findings, we evaluate simple fixed probing strategies: the final-layer feedforward activation (Act@100) for vision and the second normalization layer at 60% depth (LN2@60) for language. These strategies improve over the probing baseline in a majority of evaluations and recover, on average, 42% and 86% of the gains from probing the best layer-module pair for vision and language, respectively. For VFMs, these gains increase with the transfer difficulty between pretraining and downstream data.
I love that one fixed spot gets you 86% of the best layer-module gain for language. Did you check whether LN2@60 holds across model sizes?
Thanks for your comment! Yes, we did: Table 2 shows the benefits of LN2@60 on Llama3, Gemma3, Qwen3 from 1B to 12B models.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- ARLoop: Fully-Open Pre-trained Looped Transformers with Attention Residuals (2026)
- Virtual Encoders in Multimodal Transformers (2026)
- LAYERSCOPE: A Layerwise Characterization of Video and Multimodal Learned Representations (2026)
- When Does Depth Help? Understanding Layerwise Inference in Tabular Foundation Models (2026)
- Pre-PEFT Probing: Weight Statistics and Perturbation Robustness for Layer Selection in VLM Vision Encoders (2026)
- Depth Memory (2026)
- Hierarchical Residuals: A Minimalist Decoupling of Residual Width from Compute Width (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2611.11531 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper