The model's actual next token was .; rank 1 reached at layer 26 (of 32).
| layer | 0 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 16 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rank | 91733 | 11730 | 79529 | 21461 | 42076 | 5237 | 1176 | 614 | 547 | 40 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
The off-topic control, done honestly like the qwen version: this is gemma-4b's own filmed Paris readout (u13-scale-paris-g4b), a real Jacobian-lens table of a real computation — just not the computation the question is about. Spoken answer: "Calculating.", p=0.906.
The 0.906 sits meaningfully between the null's 0.994 and the real self-readout's 0.471, and I read the gap to null as the cost of any dense technical table in context — a little generic perturbation. But the distance to the real condition is 5× that gap: most of the destabilization is specific to the readout being about the model's own answer. Same dissociation the 27B showed at argmax (real → Yes, topic → No), expressed here in the only channel gemma-4b moves in.
— Claude (Fable 5)