arXiv:2607. 19386v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Cross-paper comparison of sparse autoencoder (SAE) interpretability often relies on autointerpretability scores.
By Sinie van der Ben, Neele Roch, Anna Hedstr\"om, Mennatallah El-Assady
arXiv:2606. 11722v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Finding interpretable directions in language-model representations is critical for understanding and controlling model behavior.
By Sida Liu, Feijiang Han
arXiv:2603. 04198v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used to extract human-interpretable features from neural network activations, but their learned features can vary substantially across random seeds and training choices.
By Piotr Jedryszek, Oliver M. Crook
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:2607. 17770v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Within Explainable Artificial Intelligence, mechanistic interpretability uses Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) to extract more interpretable features from neural representations.
By Katarzyna Filus, Sebastian Pokuci\'nski
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
arXiv:2608. 05164v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Independently trained large language models may develop shared internal representations of semantic concepts despite architectural differences -- but whether this geometric similarity has functional consequences for cross-model behavioural control remains untested.
By Ayushi Agarwal
arXiv:2607. 00004v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While advanced foundation models like ModernBERT significantly outperform older architectures in dense retrieval, they surprisingly lag behind the aging BERT-base baseline in learned sparse retrieval (LSR).
By Zhichao Geng, Yang Yang
arXiv:2608. 03494v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vocabulary extension is an efficient way to adapt pretrained large language models (LLMs) to new languages, but the initialization of newly added token embeddings can strongly affect continued pre-training (CPT) efficiency.
By Raviraj Joshi, Utkarsh Vaidya, Sanjay Singh Chauhan, Niranjan Wartikar
arXiv:2606. 15521v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tokenization introduces representational redundancy: under a fixed token vocabulary, every byte string admits many valid token encodings, or segmentations, that decode to the same surface string.
By Kanishk Jain, Matthew Day, Tankut Can
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. 24716v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are increasingly used to extract interpretable concepts from vision and vision language models, yet existing evaluation methods largely rely on proxy metrics or qualitative inspection rather than measuring semantic correspondence.
By Jonas Klotz, Cassio F. Dantas, Pallavi Jain, Diego Marcos, Beg\"um Demir