Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Models
Open accessAbstract
One of the roadblocks to a better understanding of neural networks' internals is \textit{polysemanticity}, where neurons appear to activate in multiple, semantically distinct contexts. Polysemanticity prevents us from identifying concise, human-understandable explanations for what neural networks are doing internally. One hypothesised cause of polysemanticity is \textit{superposition}, where neural networks represent more features than they have neurons by assigning features to an overcomplete set of directions in activation space, rather than to individual neurons. Here, we attempt to identify those directions, using sparse autoencoders to reconstruct the internal activations of a language model. These autoencoders learn sets of sparsely activating features that are more interpretable and monosemantic than directions identified by alternative approaches, where interpretability is measured by automated methods. Moreover, we show that with our learned set of features, we can pinpoint the features that are causally responsible for counterfactual behaviour on the indirect object identification task \citep{wang2022interpretability} to a finer degree than previous decompositions. This work indicates that it is possible to resolve superposition in language models using a scalable, unsupervised method. Our method may serve as a foundation for future mechanistic interpretability work, which we hope will enable greater model transparency and steerability.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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 heuristic perspective that superposition exists in activation space has been used as a fundamental assumption in many works that address superposition.
“However, this heuristic perspective has been used as a fundamental assumption in many works that address superposition (Cunningham et al. 2023; Bricken et al. 2023; (Templeton et al. 2024)).”
From Knowledge in Superposition: Unveiling the Failures of Lifelong Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as Cunningham et al. 2023
Some studies hypothesize that this superposition phenomenon also exists in language models and propose sparse autoencoder (SAE) and variants to disentangle superposition from activation space.
“Some studies hypothesize that this superposition phenomenon also exists in language models and propose sparse autoencoder (SAE) (Cunningham et al. 2023) and its various variants (Rajamanoharan et al. 2024; Gao et al. 2024) to attempt to disentangle superposition from the activation space of language models (Bricken et al. 2023; Templeton et al. 2024).”
From Knowledge in Superposition: Unveiling the Failures of Lifelong Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as Cunningham et al. 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 24
- Stella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Quentin Gregory Anthony, Herbie Bradley, Kyle O'Brien, Eric Hallahan, Mohammad Aflah Khan, Shivanshu Purohit, USVSN Sai Prashanth, Edward Raff, et al. Pythia: A suite for analyzing large language models across training and scaling. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 2397-2430. PMLR, 2023.
- Steven Bills, Nick Cammarata, Dan Mossing, Henk Tillman, Leo Gao, Gabriel Goh, Ilya Sutskever, Jan Leike, Jeff Wu, and William Saunders. Language models can explain neurons in lan- guage models. URL https://openaipublic. blob. core. windows. net/neuron-explainer/paper/index. html.(Date accessed: 14.05. 2023), 2023.
- Nick Cammarata, Gabriel Goh, Shan Carter, Chelsea Voss, Ludwig Schubert, and Chris Olah. Curve circuits. Distill, 2021. doi: 10.23915/distill.00024.006. https://distill.pub/2020/circuits/curve- circuits. · DOI
- Arthur Conmy, Augustine N Mavor-Parker, Aengus Lynch, Stefan Heimersheim, and Adrià Garriga- Alonso. Towards automated circuit discovery for mechanistic interpretability. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.14997, 2023. · arXiv
- Gonc ¸alo M Correia, Vlad Niculae, and André FT Martins. Adaptively sparse transformers. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pp. 2174-2184, 2019.
- Tim Dettmers, Mike Lewis, Younes Belkada, and Luke Zettlemoyer. Llm. int8 (): 8-bit matrix multiplication for transformers at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.07339, 2022. · arXiv
- Nelson Elhage, Tristan Hume, Catherine Olsson, Nicholas Schiefer, Tom Henighan, Shauna Kravec, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Robert Lasenby, Dawn Drain, Carol Chen, et al. Toy models of superposi- tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.10652, 2022b. · arXiv
- Jonathan Frankle and Michael Carbin. The lottery ticket hypothesis: Finding sparse, trainable neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.03635, 2018. · arXiv
- Kunihiko Fukushima. Cognitron: A self-organizing multilayered neural network. Biol. Cybern., 20 (3-4):121-136, sep 1975. ISSN 0340-1200. doi: 10.1007/BF00342633. URL https://doi. org/10.1007/BF00342633. · DOI
- Leo Gao, Stella Biderman, Sid Black, Laurence Golding, Travis Hoppe, Charles Foster, Jason Phang, Horace He, Anish Thite, Noa Nabeshima, et al. The pile: An 800gb dataset of diverse text for language modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00027, 2020. · arXiv
- Georgios Georgiadis. Accelerating convolutional neural networks via activation map compression. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 7085-7095, 2019.
- Dan Hendrycks, Mantas Mazeika, and Thomas Woodside. An overview of catastrophic ai risks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.12001, 2023. · arXiv
- Theodoros Kasioumis, Joe Townsend, and Hiroya Inakoshi. Elite backprop: Training sparse inter- pretable neurons. In NeSy, pp. 82-93, 2021.
- Honglak Lee, Alexis Battle, Rajat Raina, and Andrew Ng. Efficient sparse coding algorithms. Advances in neural information processing systems, 19, 2006.
- Clara Meister, Stefan Lazov, Isabelle Augenstein, and Ryan Cotterell. Is sparse attention more interpretable? In Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2021. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:235293798.
- Richard Ngo, Lawrence Chan, and Sören Mindermann. The alignment problem from a deep learning perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.00626, 2022. · arXiv
- Chris Olah, Nick Cammarata, Ludwig Schubert, Gabriel Goh, Michael Petrov, and Shan Carter. Zoom in: An introduction to circuits. Distill, 5(3):e00024-001, 2020.
- Bruno A Olshausen and David J Field. Sparse coding with an overcomplete basis set: A strategy employed by v1? Vision research, 37(23):3311-3325, 1997.
- Bruno A Olshausen and David J Field. Sparse coding of sensory inputs. Current opinion in neuro- biology, 14(4):481-487, 2004.
- Qing Qu, Yuexiang Zhai, Xiao Li, Yuqian Zhang, and Zhihui Zhu. Analysis of the optimization landscapes for overcomplete representation learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.02427, 2019. · arXiv
- Jesse Vig, Sebastian Gehrmann, Yonatan Belinkov, Sharon Qian, Daniel Nevo, Yaron Singer, and Stuart Shieber. Investigating gender bias in language models using causal mediation analysis. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:12388-12401, 2020.
- Kevin Wang, Alexandre Variengien, Arthur Conmy, Buck Shlegeris, and Jacob Steinhardt. Inter- pretability in the wild: a circuit for indirect object identification in gpt-2 small. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.00593, 2022. · arXiv
- John Wright and Yi Ma. High-dimensional data analysis with low-dimensional models: Principles, computation, and applications. Cambridge University Press, 2022.
- Zeyu Yun, Yubei Chen, Bruno A Olshausen, and Yann LeCun. Transformer visualization via dictio- nary learning: contextualized embedding as a linear superposition of transformer factors. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.15949, 2021. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cascella, M., Semeraro, F., Montomoli, J., Bellini, V., Piazza, O., & Bignami, E. (2024) · Journal of Medical Systems · doi:10.1007/s10916-024-02045-3 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
AI–AI bias: Large language models favor communications generated by large language models
Laurito, W., Davis, B., Grietzer, P., Gavenčiak, T., Böhm, A., & Kulveit, J. (2025) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2415697122 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Universal dimensions of visual representation
Chen, Z., & Bonner, M. F. (2025) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adw7697 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Causal Abstraction: A Theoretical Foundation for Mechanistic Interpretability
Geiger, A., Ibeling, D., Zur, A., Chaudhary, M., Chauhan, S., Huang, J., Arora, A., Wu, Z., Goodman, N., Potts, C., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.04709 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Bigger is not always better: The importance of human-scale language modeling for psycholinguistics
Wilcox, E. G., Hu, M. Y., Mueller, A., Warstadt, A., Choshen, L., Zhuang, C., Williams, A., Cotterell, R., & Linzen, T. (2025) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2025.104650 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
From Yes-Men to Truth-Tellers: Addressing Sycophancy in Large Language Models with Pinpoint Tuning
Chen, W., Huang, Z., Xie, L., Lin, B., Li, H., Lu, L., Tian, X., Cai, D., Zhang, Y., Wang, W., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.01658 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Improving Dictionary Learning with Gated Sparse Autoencoders
Rajamanoharan, S., Conmy, A., Smith, L., Lieberum, T., Varma, V., Kramár, J., Shah, R., & Nanda, N. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.16014 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Motivated by the superposition hypothesis, Bricken et al. (2023) and Cunningham et al. (2023) recently used sparse autoencoders (SAEs; Ng (2011)) to find sparse decompositions of model activations in terms of an overcomplete basis, or dictionary (Mallat and Zhang, 1993).”
MethodSelf-citationMechanistic interpretability for steering vision-language-action models
Häon, B., Stocking, K., Chuang, I., & Tomlin, C. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.00328 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“These clusters are injected into the model’s residual stream with a fixed coefficient, sweeping over cluster sizes [10 , 20] and activation strengths [2 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 10 , 20] .”
Hu, C., Cao, P., Chen, Y., Liu, K., & Zhao, J. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2408.07413 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“However, this heuristic perspective has been used as a fundamental assumption in many works that address superposition (Cunningham et al. 2023; Bricken et al. 2023; (Templeton et al. 2024)).”
AxBench: Steering LLMs? Even Simple Baselines Outperform Sparse Autoencoders
Wu, Z., Arora, A., Geiger, A., Wang, Z., Huang, J., Jurafsky, D., Manning, C. D., & Potts, C. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.17148
“In recent years, the goal of concept detection has broadened to the open-vocabulary setting, with unsupervised methods becoming more common (Bills et al., 2023; Huben et al., 2024; Choi et al., 2024).”
- Authors
- Cunningham, H., Ewart, A., Riggs, L., Huben, R., & Sharkey, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Bristol (GB)
- ORCID
- Sharkey, Lee
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2309.08600
- OpenAlex
- W4386839891
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Open Philanthropy Project
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Keywords
- sparse autoencoders, polysemanticity, superposition, mechanistic interpretability, language models, feature attribution, counterfactual explanations, activation space, unsupervised feature learning, model transparency
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