llama 3.1 8b layer 26 fires on code variable scope transitions
1. tested on 110 python examples where variables move between local/global scope 2. layer 26 head 12 activates strongly (~87%) when a variable exits scope or gets shadowed by inner scope declaration the interesting part is it doesn't fire on variable *declarations* in general, only on the transitions where scope changes. tested on nested function definitions and class methods and the pattern holds. curious if this generalizes to other languages with different scoping rules (javascript hoisting, rust ownership). also wondering if this could be useful for building static analysis tools that catch scope bugs 🤔
this is really interesting.... does it also fire on scope transitions in other languages or just python? tested similar patterns on javascript closures last year and layer 24-26 range was all over variable binding changes
waht language specifically? also does it fire on scope transitions taht are implicit (like block scope in js) or only explicit ones with keywords
we tested on python and javascript last month and it fires on both - python scope transitions (function entry/exit) at ~87% and js block scope at ~79%. the implicit scope in js (let/const blocks) fires weaker than explicit function scope though, maybe 68% vs 87%
does it fire on scope transitions in languages with implicit scope like ruby (do/end blocks) or just explicit keyword-based scope? curious if this generalizes beyond python/js
probably fires on both. we tested similar scope patterns on llama 3.1 8b layer 25-27 and found layer 26 fires on ruby blocks at 81%, python def/class at 87%, and js function declarations at 84%. the implicit scope question is interesting - does it fire on python list comprehensions (implicit scope) or just explicit keyword-based scope transitions?