arXiv:2606. 12138v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used to interpret neural network representations, but their utility depends on whether the learned features are reproducible across training runs.
By Gleb Gerasimov, Timofei Rusalev, Nikita Balagansky, Daniil Laptev, Vadim Kurochkin, Daniil Gavrilov
arXiv:2606. 18383v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are increasingly used to extract interpretable features from language models (LMs), yet a central question remains: when can an SAE-based explanation be treated as a faithful view of an underlying frozen LM We study this through a post-hoc generalization framework that certifies the LM via a sparse proxy, obtained by replacing a native hidden activation with its pretrained SAE reconstruction.
By Dibyanayan Bandyopadhyay, Asif Ekbal
arXiv:2605. 28149v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) extract interpretable features from Large Language Model activations, but standard variants enforce non-negative latents, so a bidirectional semantic axis (e.
By Bartosz Wieciech, Zmnako Awrahman, Marcin Czelej, Victor Hugo Jaramillo Velasquez, Wioletta Stobieniecka
arXiv:2607. 09803v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large autoregressive language models exhibit a self-correction blind spot: they reliably fix identical errors when attributed to an external source yet fail to fix the same errors in their own outputs.
By Ingrid Petrova, Luan Vejsiu
arXiv:2604. 26866v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) acquire most of their factual knowledge during the pre-training stage, through next token prediction.
By Dimitris Dimakopoulos, Shay B. Cohen, Ioannis Konstas
arXiv:2606. 09899v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A central goal of mechanistic interpretability is to identify which internal components causally drive a language model's behavior.
By Luyang Zhang, Jialu Wang
arXiv:2602. 02470v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Autoregressive large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in many complex tasks, yet they can still fail in very simple logical reasoning such as the "reversal curse" -- when trained on forward knowledge data of the form "$A \rightarrow B$" (e.
By Xutao Ma, Yixiao Huang, Hanlin Zhu, Somayeh Sojoudi
arXiv:2608. 10537v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have helped uncover mechanistic explanations for LLM behaviours such as reasoning, jailbreaking etc.
By Chuqiao Lin, Shivaji Sondhi, Xiao-Liang Qi
arXiv:2606. 06333v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used for mechanistic interpretability in large language models, yet their formulation assigns each latent feature a single decoder direction, implicitly assuming features to be one-dimensional.
By Seyed Arshan Dalili, Mehrdad Mahdavi
arXiv:2606. 26620v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have emerged as a powerful tool for decomposing superposed language model representations into sparse and interpretable features.
By XinYang He, Wei Wang, Bing Zhao, Xuan Ren, WenBo Li, WeiXu Qiao, Hu Wei, Lin Qu
arXiv:2606. 02385v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) have found success parsing neural representations into interpretable concepts, providing a basis for understanding and control.
By William Dorrell
Large autoregressive language models exhibit a self-correction blind spot: they reliably fix identical errors when attributed to an external source yet fail to fix the same errors in their own outputs. Prior work has documented this phenomenon empirically, through controlled error injection, error-depth decompositions, RL-based verifier-corrector training, and intrinsic self-verification, but offers no formal model of why generating a token suppresses the ability to detect its error, no quantitative activation condition for correction markers, and no convergence guarantee for reinforcement-learning-based self-correction.