PreprintCited by 39Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Neural Networks and ApplicationsAdvanced Neural Network Applications

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interpreting Neural Networks through the Polytope Lens

Open access

Abstract

Mechanistic interpretability aims to explain what a neural network has learned at a nuts-and-bolts level. What are the fundamental primitives of neural network representations? Previous mechanistic descriptions have used individual neurons or their linear combinations to understand the representations a network has learned. But there are clues that neurons and their linear combinations are not the correct fundamental units of description: directions cannot describe how neural networks use nonlinearities to structure their representations. Moreover, many instances of individual neurons and their combinations are polysemantic (i.e. they have multiple unrelated meanings). Polysemanticity makes interpreting the network in terms of neurons or directions challenging since we can no longer assign a specific feature to a neural unit. In order to find a basic unit of description that does not suffer from these problems, we zoom in beyond just directions to study the way that piecewise linear activation functions (such as ReLU) partition the activation space into numerous discrete polytopes. We call this perspective the polytope lens. The polytope lens makes concrete predictions about the behavior of neural networks, which we evaluate through experiments on both convolutional image classifiers and language models. Specifically, we show that polytopes can be used to identify monosemantic regions of activation space (while directions are not in general monosemantic) and that the density of polytope boundaries reflect semantic boundaries. We also outline a vision for what mechanistic interpretability might look like through the polytope lens.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2211.12312

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The strong version of the linear representation hypothesis is false for some models.

    “Some works have shown that the strong version is false for some models (Black et al., 2022;Csordás et al., 2024).”

    From Open Problems in Mechanistic Interpretability (2025) · cites this paper as Black et al., 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Y. Abu-Mostafa and J. St. Jacques. Information capacity of the Hopfield model. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 31(4):461-464, July 1985. ISSN 0018-9448. doi: 10.1109/TIT.1985. 1057069. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1057069/. · DOI
  2. Randall Balestriero and richard baraniuk. A spline theory of deep learning. In Jennifer Dy and Andreas Krause, editors, Proceedings of the 35th international conference on ma- chine learning, volume 80 of Proceedings of machine learning research, pages 374-383.
  3. PMLR, July 2018. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v80/balestriero18b.html. tex.pdf: http://proceedings.mlr.press/v80/balestriero18b/balestriero18b.pdf.
  4. Randall Balestriero and Richard Baraniuk. Mad Max: Affine Spline Insights into Deep Learning, November 2018a. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1805.06576. arXiv:1805.06576 [cs, stat]. · arXiv
  5. Randall Balestriero and Richard G. Baraniuk. From Hard to Soft: Understanding Deep Network Nonlinearities via Vector Quantization and Statistical Inference, October 2018b. URL http: //arxiv.org/abs/1810.09274. arXiv:1810.09274 [cs, stat]. · arXiv
  6. Randall Balestriero, Romain Cosentino, Behnaam Aazhang, and Richard Baraniuk. The Geometry of Deep Networks: Power Diagram Subdivision, May 2019. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1905. 08443. arXiv:1905.08443 [cs, stat]. · arXiv
  7. Tolga Bolukbasi, Adam Pearce, Ann Yuan, Andy Coenen, Emily Reif, Fernanda Viégas, and Martin Wattenberg. An Interpretability Illusion for BERT, April 2021. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/ 2104.07143. arXiv:2104.07143 [cs]. · arXiv
  8. Nick Cammarata, Shan Carter, Gabriel Goh, Chris Olah, Michael Petrov, and Ludwig Schubert. Thread: Circuits. Distill, 5(3):10.23915/distill.00024, March 2020a. ISSN 2476-0757. doi: 10. 23915/distill.00024. URL https://distill.pub/2020/circuits. · DOI
  9. Nick Cammarata, Shan Carter, Gabriel Goh, Chris Olah, Michael Petrov, Ludwig Schubert, Chelsea Voss, Ben Egan, and Swee Kiat Lim. Thread: Circuits. Distill, 2020b. doi: 10.23915/distill.00024. · DOI
  10. Nick Cammarata, Gabriel Goh, Shan Carter, Ludwig Schubert, Michael Petrov, and Chris Olah. Curve detectors. Distill, 2020c. doi: 10.23915/distill.00024.003. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Nick Cammarata, Gabriel Goh, Shan Carter, Chelsea Voss, Ludwig Schubert, and Chris Olah. Curve circuits. Distill, 2021. doi: 10.23915/distill.00024.006. · DOI
  12. Mark M. Churchland and Krishna V. Shenoy. Temporal Complexity and Heterogeneity of Single- Neuron Activity in Premotor and Motor Cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 97(6):4235- 4257, June 2007. ISSN 0022-3077, 1522-1598. doi: 10.1152/jn.00095.2007. URL https: //www.physiology.org/doi/10.1152/jn.00095.2007. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Damai Dai, Li Dong, Yaru Hao, Zhifang Sui, Baobao Chang, and Furu Wei. Knowledge Neurons in Pretrained Transformers, March 2022. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2104.08696. arXiv:2104.08696 [cs. · arXiv
  14. Nadir Durrani, Hassan Sajjad, Fahim Dalvi, and Yonatan Belinkov. Analyzing Individual Neu- rons in Pre-trained Language Models, October 2020. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.02695. arXiv:2010.02695 [cs. · arXiv
  15. Stefano Fusi, Earl K Miller, and Mattia Rigotti. Why neurons mix: high dimensionality for higher cognition. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 37:66-74, April 2016. ISSN 09594388. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2016.01.010. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S0959438816000118. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Mor Geva, Roei Schuster, Jonathan Berant, and Omer Levy. Transformer Feed-Forward Lay- ers Are Key-Value Memories, September 2021. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.14913. arXiv:2012.14913 [cs. · arXiv
  17. Gabriel Goh, Nick Cammarata †, Chelsea Voss †, Shan Carter, Michael Petrov, Ludwig Schubert, Alec Radford, and Chris Olah. Multimodal neurons in artificial neural networks. Distill, 2021. doi: 10.23915/distill.00030. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Boris Hanin and David Rolnick. Complexity of linear regions in deep networks. In Kamalika Chaudhuri and Ruslan Salakhutdinov, editors, Proceedings of the 36th international confer- ence on machine learning, volume 97 of Proceedings of machine learning research, pages 2596- 2604. PMLR, June 2019a. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/hanin19a.html. tex.pdf: http://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/hanin19a/hanin19a.pdf.
  19. Boris Hanin and David Rolnick. Deep ReLU Networks Have Surprisingly Few Activation Patterns, October 2019b. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.00904. arXiv:1906.00904 [cs, math, stat]. · arXiv
  20. Geoffrey F. Hinton. Shape representation in parallel systems. In Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on artificial intelligence -volume 2, IJCAI'81, pages 1088-1096, San Francisco, CA, USA, 1981. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. Number of pages: 9 Place: Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  21. D. H. Hubel and T. N. Wiesel. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. The Journal of Physiology, 160(1):106-154, January 1962. ISSN 00223751. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837. URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ 10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Christian Keup and Moritz Helias. Origami in N dimensions: How feed-forward networks manufacture linear separability, March 2022. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2203.11355. arXiv:2203.11355 [cond-mat, stat]. · arXiv
  23. J. Lettvin, H. Maturana, W. McCulloch, and W. Pitts. What the Frog's Eye Tells the Frog's Brain. Proceedings of the IRE, 47(11):1940-1951, November 1959. ISSN 0096-8390. doi: 10. 1109/JRPROC.1959.287207. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4065609/. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Valerio Mante, David Sussillo, Krishna V. Shenoy, and William T. Newsome. Context-dependent computation by recurrent dynamics in prefrontal cortex. Nature, 503(7474):78-84, November 2013. ISSN 0028-0836, 1476-4687. doi: 10.1038/nature12742. URL http://www.nature.com/ articles/nature12742. · DOI
  25. Vinod Nair and Geoffrey E. Hinton. Rectified linear units improve restricted boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on international conference on machine learn- ing, ICML'10, pages 807-814, Madison, WI, USA, 2010. Omnipress. ISBN 978-1-60558-907-7. Number of pages: 8 Place: Haifa, Israel.
  26. Anh Nguyen, Jason Yosinski, and Jeff Clune. Multifaceted Feature Visualization: Uncovering the Different Types of Features Learned By Each Neuron in Deep Neural Networks, May 2016. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.03616. arXiv:1602.03616 [cs]. · arXiv
  27. Roman Novak, Yasaman Bahri, Daniel A. Abolafia, Jeffrey Pennington, and Jascha Sohl-Dickstein. Sensitivity and Generalization in Neural Networks: an Empirical Study, June 2018. URL http: //arxiv.org/abs/1802.08760. arXiv:1802.08760 [cs, stat]. · arXiv
  28. Chris Olah, Alexander Mordvintsev, and Ludwig Schubert. Feature visualization. Distill, 2017. doi: 10.23915/distill.00007. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Chris Olah, Arvind Satyanarayan, Ian Johnson, Shan Carter, Ludwig Schubert, Katherine Ye, and Alexander Mordvintsev. The building blocks of interpretability. Distill, 2018. doi: 10.23915/ distill.00010. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Razvan Pascanu, Guido Montufar, and Yoshua Bengio. On the number of response regions of deep feed forward networks with piece-wise linear activations, February 2014. URL http://arxiv. org/abs/1312.6098. arXiv:1312.6098 [cs]. · arXiv
  31. Rodrigo Quian Quiroga, Alexander Kraskov, Christof Koch, and Itzhak Fried. Explicit Encoding of Multimodal Percepts by Single Neurons in the Human Brain. Current Biology, 19(15):1308- 1313, August 2009. ISSN 09609822. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.06.060. URL https://linkinghub. elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982209013773. · DOI
  32. Mattia Rigotti, Omri Barak, Melissa R. Warden, Xiao-Jing Wang, Nathaniel D. Daw, Earl K. Miller, and Stefano Fusi. The importance of mixed selectivity in complex cognitive tasks. Nature, 497(7451):585-590, May 2013. ISSN 0028-0836, 1476-4687. doi: 10.1038/nature12160. URL http://www.nature.com/articles/nature12160. · DOI · Paper page
  33. David Rolnick and Konrad Kording. Reverse-engineering deep ReLU networks. In Hal Daumé III and Aarti Singh, editors, Proceedings of the 37th international conference on ma- chine learning, volume 119 of Proceedings of machine learning research, pages 8178-8187.
  34. PMLR, July 2020. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/rolnick20a.html. tex.pdf: http://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/rolnick20a/rolnick20a.pdf.
  35. Shreya Saxena and John P Cunningham. Towards the neural population doctrine. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 55:103-111, April 2019a. ISSN 09594388. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2019.02.002. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959438818300990. · DOI
  36. Shreya Saxena and John P Cunningham. Towards the neural population doctrine. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 55:103-111, April 2019b. ISSN 09594388. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2019.02.002. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959438818300990. · DOI
  37. Justine Sergent, Shinsuke Ohta, and Brennan Macdonald. Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing. A positron emission tomography study. Brain, 115(1):15-36, 1992. ISSN 0006-8950, 1460-2156. doi: 10.1093/brain/115.1.15. URL https://academic.oup.com/brain/ article-lookup/doi/10.1093/brain/115.1.15. · DOI
  38. Rupesh Kumar Srivastava, Jonathan Masci, Faustino Gomez, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Under- standing Locally Competitive Networks, April 2015. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.1165. arXiv:1410.1165 [cs]. · arXiv
  39. Christian Szegedy, Wojciech Zaremba, Ilya Sutskever, Joan Bruna, Dumitru Erhan, Ian Goodfellow, and Rob Fergus. Intriguing properties of neural networks. 2014. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1312.6199v4.
  40. Seiji Tanabe. Population codes in the visual cortex. Neuroscience Research, 76(3):101-105, July 2013. ISSN 01680102. doi: 10.1016/j.neures.2013.03.010. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier. com/retrieve/pii/S0168010213000874. · DOI
  41. Lloyd N. Trefethen. Approximation Theory and Approximation Practice, Extended Edition. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, January 2019. ISBN 978-1-61197- 593-2 978-1-61197-594-9. doi: 10.1137/1.9781611975949. URL https://epubs.siam.org/doi/ book/10.1137/1.9781611975949. · DOI
  42. Shaojie Xu, Joel Vaughan, Jie Chen, Aijun Zhang, and Agus Sudjianto. Traversing the local polytopes of ReLU neural networks. In The AAAI-22 workshop on adversarial machine learning and beyond, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=EQjwT2-Vaba.
  43. Rafael Yuste. From the neuron doctrine to neural networks. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16 (8):487-497, August 2015. ISSN 1471-003X, 1471-0048. doi: 10.1038/nrn3962. URL http: //www.nature.com/articles/nrn3962. · DOI
  44. Bolei Zhou, Aditya Khosla, Agata Lapedriza, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba. Object Detectors Emerge in Deep Scene CNNs. 2015. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6856v2. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Black, S., Sharkey, L., Grinsztajn, L., Winsor, E., Braun, D., Merizian, J., Parker, K., Guevara, C. R., Millidge, B., Alfour, G., & Leahy, C.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2022
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309874180
Cited by
39
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
mechanistic interpretability, neural network representations, polytopes, piecewise linear activation functions, ReLU, polysemanticity, semantic boundaries, neural network interpretability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review