We present a novel approach to bias mitigation in large language models (LLMs) by applying steering vectors to modify model activations in forward passes. We compute 8 steering vectors, each corresponding to a different social bias axis, such as age, gender, or race, on a training subset of the BBQ dataset and compare the effectiveness of these to 3 additional bias mitigation methods across 4 datasets. When optimized on the BBQ dataset, our individually tuned steering vectors achieve average improvements of 12.8% on BBQ, 8.3% on CLEAR-Bias, and 1% on StereoSet, and show improvements over prompting and Self-Debias in all cases, and improvements over fine-tuning in 12 out of 17 evaluations. In addition, steering vectors showed the lowest impact on MMLU scores of the four bias mitigation methods tested. The work presents the first systematic investigation of steering vectors for bias mitigation, and we demonstrate that they are a powerful and computationally efficient strategy for reducing bias in LLMs, with broader implications for enhancing AI safety.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been found to struggle with systematic reasoning. Even on tasks where they appear to perform well, their performance often depends on shortcuts, rather than on genuine reasoning abilities, leading them to collapse on out-of-distribution (OOD) examples. Post-training strategies based on reinforcement learning and chain-of-thought prompting have recently been hailed as a step change. However, little is known about the potential of the resulting “Large Reasoning Models” (LRMs) beyond maths and programming-based problem solving, where genuine OOD problems can be sparse. In this paper, we focus on tasks that require systematic relational composition for qualitative spatial and temporal reasoning. The setting allows fine control over problem difficulty to precisely measure OOD generalization. We find that, zero-shot LRMs generally outperform their LLM counterparts in single-path reasoning tasks but struggle in the multi-path setting. Whilst showing comparatively better results, fine-tuned LLMs are also not capable of multi-path generalization. We also provide evidence for the behavioral interpretation for this, i.e., that LRMs are shallow disjunctive reasoners.