Nicheloom

Market intelligence for builders — see what's gaining traction before it's crowded.

Symbolic Circuit Distillation: prove program to LLM circuit equivalence

Details

External ID
46518608
Source
HN
Company
—
Product
Symbolic Circuit Distillation: prove program to LLM circuit equivalence
Website domain
github.com
Launched
Jan. 6, 2026
Cohort
—
Upvotes
16
Upvotes percentile
0.6212121212121212
Tags
—
Fetched at
Sept. 7, 2026, 9:25 p.m.
Updated at
Sept. 7, 2026, 9:25 p.m.

Description

Hi HN, I've been exploring various applications of formal methods to ML/interpretability and I've been hoping to get more eyes on the approach.I have been working on a small interpretability project I call Symbolic Circuit Distillation. The goal is to take a tiny neuron-level circuit (like the ones in OpenAI's "Sparse Circuits" work) and automatically recover a concise Python program that implements the same algorithm, along with a bounded formal proof that the two are equivalent on a finite token domain.Roughly, the pipeline is:1. Start from a pruned circuit graph for a specific behavior (e.g. quote closing or bracket depth) extracted from a transformer. 2. Treat the circuit as an executable function and train a tiny ReLU network ("surrogate") that exactly matches the circuit on all inputs in a bounded domain (typically sequences of length 5–10 over a small token alphabet). 3. Search over a constrained DSL of common transformer motifs (counters, toggles, threshold detectors, small state machines) to synthesize candidate Python programs. 4. Use SMT-based bounded equivalence checking to either: - Prove that a candidate program and the surrogate agree on all inputs in the domain, or - Produce a counterexample input that rules the program out.If the solver finds a proof, you get a small, human-readable Python function plus a machine-checkable guarantee that it matches the original circuit on that bounded domain.Why I built thisMechanistic interpretability has gotten pretty good at extracting "small crisp circuits" from large models, but turning those graphs into clean, human-readable algorithms is still very manual. My goal here is to automate that last step: go from "here is a sparse circuit" to "here is a verified algorithm that explains what it does", without hand-holding.What works today- Tasks: quote closing and bracket-depth detection from the OpenAI circuit_sparsity repo. - Exact surrogate fitting on a finite token domain. - DSL templates for simple counters, toggles, and small state machines. - SMT-based bounded equivalence between: sparse circuit -> ReLU surrogate -> Python program in the DSL.Limitations and open questions- The guarantees are bounded: equivalence is only proven on a finite token domain (short sequences and a small vocabulary). - Currently focused on very small circuits. Scaling to larger circuits and longer contexts is open engineering and research work. - The DSL is hand-designed around a few motifs. I am not yet learning the DSL itself or doing anything very clever in the search.What I would love feedback on- Are the problem framing and guarantees interesting to people working on mechanistic interpretability or formal methods? - Suggestions for next benchmarks: which circuits or behaviors would you want to see distilled next? - Feedback on the DSL design, search strategy, and SMT setup.Happy to answer questions about implementation details, the SMT encoding, integration with OpenAI's Sparse Circuits repo, or anything else.

Enrichment

Theme
scientific computing and deep tech tools
Vertical
Horizontal
Function
Dev tools
Audience
Developer
AI stance
AI-native
Project type
Hobby / open-source project
Normalized one-liner
prove program equivalence to llm circuits
Manually corrected
False

Could you build this?

No Proving program equivalence to neural network circuits requires advanced formal methods, SMT solvers, and deep mechanistic interpretability research expertise.

What it would actually take: A working system requires integrating mechanistic interpretability tooling (such as TransformerLens) to identify and isolate sub-circuits, translation of neural weight activations into formal logic constraints, and symbolic SMT/SAT verification engines (like Z3 or CVC5) to prove functional equivalence against programmatic specifications. It requires deep research expertise in both formal verification and transformer interpretability theory.

Discussion

2 comments analyzed.

Concerns raised: Lack of examples in readme documentation

Competitors

Other products that read as similar to this one — 99 launches clear the similarity bar, closest 8 shown.

Attention rank: #37 of 100 (itself plus its competitors, highest first — normalized so YC and Product Hunt are compared fairly).

Launched 64 days after the earliest competitor.

Other launches for this product

Same idea, different domain

Nobody's really built a dev tools tool for Sales yet.