PreprintCited by 3Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Topic ModelingAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Improving Dictionary Learning with Gated Sparse Autoencoders

Open access
Rajamanoharan, Senthooran, Conmy, Arthur, Smith, Lewis, Lieberum, Tom, Varma, Vikrant, Kramár, János, Shah, Rohin, Nanda, Neel·2024·arXiv

Abstract

Recent work has found that sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are an effective technique for unsupervised discovery of interpretable features in language models' (LMs) activations, by finding sparse, linear reconstructions of LM activations. We introduce the Gated Sparse Autoencoder (Gated SAE), which achieves a Pareto improvement over training with prevailing methods. In SAEs, the L1 penalty used to encourage sparsity introduces many undesirable biases, such as shrinkage -- systematic underestimation of feature activations. The key insight of Gated SAEs is to separate the functionality of (a) determining which directions to use and (b) estimating the magnitudes of those directions: this enables us to apply the L1 penalty only to the former, limiting the scope of undesirable side effects. Through training SAEs on LMs of up to 7B parameters we find that, in typical hyper-parameter ranges, Gated SAEs solve shrinkage, are similarly interpretable, and require half as many firing features to achieve comparable reconstruction fidelity.

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.2404.16014

Cites

24 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • 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).”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

20 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. S. Bills, N. Cammarata, D. Mossing, H. Tillman, L. Gao, G. Goh, I. Sutskever, J. Leike, J. Wu, and W. Saunders. Language models can explain neurons in language models. https: //openaipublic.blob.core.windows.net/neuron-explainer/paper/index.html, 2023.
  2. R. T. Chen, X. Li, R. B. Grosse, and D. K. Duvenaud. Isolating sources of disentanglement in variational autoencoders. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31, 2018.
  3. E. Mathieu, T. Rainforth, N. Siddharth, and Y. W. Teh. Disentangling disentanglement in variational autoencoders. In International conference on machine learning, pages 4402-4412. PMLR, 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rajamanoharan, S., Conmy, A., Smith, L., Lieberum, T., Varma, V., Kramár, J., Shah, R., & Nanda, N.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4395484123
Cited by
3
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
sparse autoencoders, dictionary learning, interpretability, l1 penalty, feature sparsity

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