arXiv:2609. 12591v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Foundation models are increasingly adapted through fine-tuning, model editing, and alignment procedures while retaining previously acquired capabilities.
arXiv:2607. 20596v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse autoencoder (SAE) features are used to interpret and steer large language models, yet whether a feature's causal role is stable across SAE families remains untested.
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.
arXiv:2606. 08365v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse autoencoder (SAE) features are increasingly used to steer language models, but feature steering is rarely clean: the same intervention can behave inconsistently across contexts and perturb unrelated features.
arXiv:2607. 12166v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are the standard for decomposing superposed neural representations into interpretable features, and evaluation relies predominantly on correlational recovery metrics -- cosine similarity between ground-truth directions and decoder atoms.
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.
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.
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.
arXiv:2606. 03002v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Quantization is a standard path to deploying large language models, and a quantized model is typically judged acceptable when its perplexity or downstream accuracy stays close to the full-precision original.
Linear probes can decode safety‑relevant concepts such as truthfulness from language‑model activations, but probe accuracy may reflect only decodability, not causal influence on model behavior. The authors show that probe weight geometry alone cannot identify the features the model actually uses, because geometrically aligned features need not be causally relevant. They introduce a sparse‑autoencoder (SAE) decomposition that ranks features by probe alignment and gradient sensitivity, and demonstrate that ablating shared, probe‑only, and random feature sets reveals a sharp dissociation: shared features drive model output changes far more than probe‑only or random features, confirming that causal relevance requires intervention beyond weight geometry.
arXiv:2606. 14990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are standard tools for mechanistic interpretability, but current SAE families are constrained by fixed encoder nonlinearities such as ReLU, JumpReLU, and TopK.
arXiv:2607. 19386v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Cross-paper comparison of sparse autoencoder (SAE) interpretability often relies on autointerpretability scores.
arXiv:2606. 27474v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: How should we evaluate generation systems that combine autoregressive (AR) and diffusion decoding?