Simulated Adoption: Decoupling Magnitude and Direction in LLM In-Context Conflict Resolution

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently prioritize conflicting in-context information over pre-existing parametric memory, a phenomenon often termed sycophancy or compliance. However, the mechanistic realization of this behavior remains obscure, specifically how the model resolves these knowledge conflicts through compliance, and whether this suppression arises from signal magnitude dilution or directional geometric alteration within the residual stream. To resolve this, we conducted a layer-wise geometric analysis across Qwen-3-4B, Llama-3.1-8B, and GLM-4-9B, decomposing the residual stream updates induced by counter-factual contexts into radial (norm-based) and angular (cosine-based) components. Our empirical results reject the universality of the "Manifold Dilution" hypothesis, as two of the three architectures maintained stable residual norms despite exhibiting significant performance degradation on factual queries. Instead, we observed that compliance is consistently characterized by "Orthogonal Interference," where the conflicting context injects a steering vector that is quasi-orthogonal to the ground-truth direction, effectively rotating the hidden state representation. This suggests that models do not "unlearn" or suppress the magnitude of internal truths but rather employ a mechanism of geometric displacement to bypass the correct unembedding vector, effectively simulating adoption while preserving the original structural magnitude. These findings challenge scalar confidence metrics for detecting hallucinations and underscore the necessity of vectorial monitoring to distinguish between genuine knowledge integration and superficial in-context mimicry.