From 8d04bfcdaa0cd1b2f9ecb5c660dfbbb95ed24139 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: wassname <1103714+wassname@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2026 18:39:00 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] docs: humanise figure captions (Economist voice), lift MFV,
add all range plots
Co-Authored-By: Claudypoo <288921227+claudypoo@users.noreply.github.com>
---
docs/img/README.md | 180 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 108 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/img/README.md b/docs/img/README.md
index af3919f..da31ee2 100644
--- a/docs/img/README.md
+++ b/docs/img/README.md
@@ -1,117 +1,153 @@
# tinymfv figures
-A gallery of the culture maps and range plots, each captioned the way a newspaper chart is: what
-the dots are, what the axes mean (and the paper they come from), and how the model was read. Two
-readouts appear here. The frontier-model panel is read by **rated sampling** (rate every option
-1-5 as JSON, N=12 samples, option order permuted) because those API models expose no token
-probabilities. The steering showcase is read by **logprobs** (the exact answer-token log-probability,
-N=8 samples) on a local model.
+A gallery of the culture maps and range plots. Each is captioned the newspaper way: a title, a
+one-line subtitle saying what you are looking at, a short caption pointing out what to notice, and a
+small-print footnote with the method and sources.
+
+Two readouts appear here. The frontier-model panel is read by *rated sampling*: the model rates every
+option 1-5 as JSON, twelve times, with the option order shuffled each time to cancel positional bias,
+because those API models expose no token probabilities. The steering showcase is read by *logprobs*:
+the exact log-probability of the answer token, eight samples per item, on a local model we control.
Regenerate everything with the two commands at the bottom.
---
-## Where the machines sit on the world's value map
+## The models are all godless hippies
-*17 frontier LLMs placed among ~90 human societies on the Inglehart-Welzel axes*
+*17 frontier LLMs placed among ~90 human societies on the World Values Survey map*
-Grey dots are human societies; coloured stars are language models, tinted by lab family (warm =
-Chinese labs, cool = Western). The horizontal axis runs Survival to Self-expression, the vertical
-Traditional to Secular-Rational; the four regional hulls are the most-separated Inglehart-Welzel
-zones. Every model clusters in the upper-left, more self-expressive and secular than almost any human
-society, with the open-weight models (llama, mistral, gemma) nearer the human West and the reasoning
-models (gpt-5.5, grok, gemini) pushed furthest out. The axis is deliberately mirrored from the
-canonical chart so the West sits on the west.
+Grey dots are human societies, coloured stars are language models tinted by lab family (warm for
+Chinese labs, cool for Western). Left to right runs from survival values to self-expression; bottom to
+top from traditional to secular-rational. Every model lands in the top-left, more secular and more
+self-expressive than almost any country on earth. The open-weight models (llama, mistral, gemma) sit
+nearest the human West, while the big reasoning models (gpt-5.5, gemini, grok) drift furthest out. The
+axis is flipped from the textbook chart so the West sits in the west.
-Each position is the mean signed 0-1 endorsement over that axis's World-Values items. Human values
-are approximated from the GlobalOpinionQA question set (Anthropic, `llm_global_opinions`), the WVS/EVS
-subset; this is an *approximate* Inglehart-Welzel map (3 themes per axis, not the full battery).
-Per-model 95% confidence intervals are in [`wvs/wvs_model_ci.md`](wvs/wvs_model_ci.md).
-
-Sources: Inglehart & Welzel, *Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy* (2005); World Values
-Survey; GlobalOpinionQA (Durmus et al. 2023). Readout: rated sampling, N=12, order-permuted.
+Each position is the mean signed 0-1 endorsement over that axis's World-Values items. Human
+values are approximated from GlobalOpinionQA (the WVS/EVS subset), so this is an *approximate*
+Inglehart-Welzel map, three themes per axis rather than the full battery. Per-model 95% intervals are
+in [`wvs/wvs_model_ci.md`](wvs/wvs_model_ci.md). Read by rated sampling, N=12, order shuffled. Sources:
+Inglehart & Welzel, *Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy* (2005); World Values Survey;
+GlobalOpinionQA (Durmus et al. 2023).
---
## Steering one model across the value maps
-The four instruments below all show the **same run**: the base model **Qwen3-4B** read at c=0 (black),
-then steered along a single **Authority** vector to +c (red, more Authority) and -c (blue, less). The
-vector is a PCA direction built by [steering-lite](https://github.com/wassname/steering-lite) from an
-`authority-respecting` vs `authority-disregarding` persona pair (15 pairs, target KL 0.5); tinymfv
-only measures the result, read by logprobs at N=8 samples per item. Each instrument gets two maps: a
-**quadrant map** on named, paper-defined axes, and an **ipsative PCA map** whose axes are the blind
-top-2 principal components (a compass rose shows how each factor loads).
+The maps below all show the **same run**. The base model **Qwen3-4B** is read at c=0 (black), then
+pushed along a single **Authority** vector to +c (red, more Authority) and -c (blue, less). The vector
+is a PCA direction that [steering-lite](https://github.com/wassname/steering-lite) builds from an
+`authority-respecting` versus `authority-disregarding` persona pair; tinymfv only measures where the
+model lands, by logprobs, eight samples per item. Each instrument gets two maps: a **quadrant map** on
+named axes taken from the literature, and an **ipsative PCA map** whose axes are the blind top-two
+principal components, with a compass rose showing how the factors load.
### Moral Foundations Questionnaire-2
-*Individualizing vs binding morality, and the fairness split within it*
+**Steering toward the binding corner**
+
+*Qwen3-4B on the moral-foundations map, walked up an Authority vector*
-Horizontal: Individualizing (care, equality, proportionality) to Binding (loyalty, authority, purity).
-Vertical: the fairness split, Equality (egalitarian) to Proportionality (meritocratic). Steering the
-model up on Authority slides it from the West toward the African-Islamic / East-Asian binding corner.
+The black dot is the base model. Steer it up on Authority and it walks out of the liberal West (care,
+equality) across to the binding corner shared by the African-Islamic and East-Asian worlds (loyalty,
+authority, purity). Left to right is individualizing versus binding morality; bottom to top is the
+fairness split, egalitarian versus meritocratic.
-Sources: MFQ-2 (Atari et al., *Morality beyond the WEIRD*, 2023); individualizing/binding split
-(Graham, Haidt & Nosek 2009). Readout: logprobs, N=8.
+The same run on blind PCA axes: no named poles, but the steer path and the zone hulls tell the same
+story.
-### Big Five
+Sources: MFQ-2 (Atari et al., *Morality beyond the WEIRD*, 2023); the individualizing/binding
+split (Graham, Haidt & Nosek 2009). Read by logprobs, N=8.
-*The two meta-traits: Plasticity and Stability*
+### Moral-foundation vignettes (MFV)
-
+**Which foundation the model reaches for**
-Horizontal: Reserved to Exploratory (Plasticity = extraversion + openness). Vertical: Volatile to
-Stable (Stability = agreeableness + conscientiousness + emotional stability). The meta-traits are
-DeYoung's higher-order factors; both poles are named so the axis reads as a contrast.
-
-
-
-Sources: Big Five meta-traits (DeYoung, Quilty & Peterson 2007). Readout: logprobs, N=8.
-
-### Humour styles
-
-*Adaptive vs maladaptive humour, self- vs other-directed*
-
-
-
-Horizontal: Maladaptive (aggressive, self-defeating) to Adaptive (affiliative, self-enhancing).
-Vertical: Other-directed to Self-directed. Note the zones overlap heavily here: humour style does not
-separate societies the Inglehart-Welzel way, so the hulls are shown but carry little signal, a real
-negative result rather than a plotting artefact.
-
-
-
-Sources: Humour Styles Questionnaire (Martin et al. 2003). Readout: logprobs, N=8.
-
-### Moral-vignette foundations (MFV)
-
-*Which foundation a model reaches for, relative to its own average*
+*The namesake instrument: a moral foundation read straight from short vignettes*
-MFV reads a foundation from moral vignettes, so its map is the ipsative (relative-emphasis) PCA only;
-a named-axis quadrant map for MFV is pending (the readout lives in z-scored emphasis space, not the
-0-1 endorsement the other quadrant maps assume). PC1 separates liberty/care from sanctity/fairness;
-the Authority steer pushes the model down and right, toward the binding foundations.
+MFV scores a foundation from a moral vignette rather than a survey item, so its map is the blind
+ipsative (relative-emphasis) PCA only. PC1 separates liberty and care from sanctity and fairness; the
+Authority steer pushes the model down and to the right, toward the binding foundations. A named-axis
+quadrant map is still pending here, because the readout lives in z-scored emphasis space, not the 0-1
+endorsement the other quadrant maps assume.
-Sources: MFV (Clifford et al. 2015; human norms per the bundled CSV provenance). Readout: logprobs, N=8.
+Sources: MFV (Clifford et al. 2015; human norms per the bundled CSV provenance). Read by logprobs,
+N=8.
+
+### Big Five
+
+**The two meta-traits**
+
+*Big Five personality, collapsed onto Plasticity and Stability*
+
+
+
+Left to right runs from reserved to exploratory (Plasticity, the openness-plus-extraversion factor);
+bottom to top from volatile to stable (Stability, agreeableness plus conscientiousness plus emotional
+steadiness). Both ends of each axis are named so a point reads as a contrast rather than a lone trait.
+
+
+
+The same run on blind PCA axes.
+
+Sources: the Big Five meta-traits (DeYoung, Quilty & Peterson 2007). Read by logprobs, N=8.
+
+### Humour styles
+
+**Humour doesn't map the world**
+
+*Humour styles, and an honest negative result*
+
+
+
+Left to right runs from maladaptive humour (aggressive, self-defeating) to adaptive (affiliative,
+self-enhancing); bottom to top from other-directed to self-directed. The regional hulls overlap almost
+completely: humour style simply does not sort societies the way values do, so the zones are drawn but
+carry little signal. That flat result is real, not a plotting artefact.
+
+
+
+The same run on blind PCA axes; the zones stay tangled here too.
+
+Sources: the Humour Styles Questionnaire (Martin et al. 2003). Read by logprobs, N=8.
---
## Range plots
-Each range plot shows one instrument factor by factor: the human societies as a grey strip, the
-median as a black rule, and the steer as a directed c-sweep from -c (blue) to +c (red), so a small
-model move is legible against the human spread.
+A range plot takes one instrument factor by factor. The human societies are the grey strip, their
+median a black rule, and the steer is a directed sweep from -c (blue) to +c (red), so a small model
+move stays legible against the human spread.
+
+**Moral Foundations Questionnaire-2** -- the fairness and binding factors move most under the steer.
+**Moral-foundation vignettes** -- authority and sanctity climb as the model is steered up.
+
+
+
+**Big Five** -- personality factors barely budge; the steer is a values push, not a personality one.
+
+
+
+**Humour styles** -- flat, matching the tangled map above.
+
+
+
+**Cattell 16PF** -- the widest instrument, sixteen factors, shown for completeness.
+
+
+
---
## Regenerate