Good Papers

Instruction Anchor: Dissecting the Mechanistic Dynamics of Modality Arbitration

Instruction tokens structurally anchor modality arbitration via shallow-layer multimodal buffering and deep-layer selective subspace resolution by sparse attention heads, with targeted intervention validating functional specificity.

Yu Zhang, Mufan Xu, Xuefeng Bai, Kehai Chen, Pengfei Zhang, Yang Xiang, Min zhang

Published 2026Sydney Poster Session 5 · Thu, Dec 10, 10:00 AM–1:00 PM local time · Hall 1-4▲ 7 on Hugging FacearXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

80%
OverallMust read
?
OverallMust readVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel12/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 5/5
medium 6/10
strict 1/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

Modality following is the ability to selectively leverage multimodal contexts based on user instructions. It is fundamental to the safety and reliability of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in real-world deployments. However, the internal mechanisms governing this decision-making process remain largely under-explored. In this work, we investigate the mechanism underlying modality following through an information flow perspective. Our findings reveal that instruction tokens serve as structural anchor for modality arbitration: Shallow attention layers perform undifferentiated information transfer, aggregating multimodal cues to instruction tokens as a latent buffer; in contrast, deep attention layers selectively strengthen the instruction-compliant subspace and resolve modality arbitration according to the instruction-specified intent, with a sparse subset of attention heads driving this process. Targeted attention-head interventions further validate the functional specificity of these heads: blocking only $5\%$ of the identified heads substantially degrades modality following while preserving general visual and language capabilities, whereas targeted amplification can restore failed modality-following samples by up to approximately $60\%$. Together, this work provides a mechanistic account of modality following and informs future efforts to improve how MLLMs integrate and utilize multimodal evidence under user instructions.