arXiv AI By Hwiyeong Lee, Ingyu Bang, Uiji Hwang, Hyelim Lim, Taeuk Kim

Query Lens: Interpreting Sparse Key-Value Features with Indirect Effects

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2606. 07617v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While sparse autoencoders provide features more interpretable than individual neurons, reliably characterizing them remains challenging.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 27

Sparse Autoencoders Encode Both Concepts and Functions: The Downstream Geometry of Feature Effects

The wide-scale use of sparse autoencoders (SAEs) as interpretability tools is limited by inconsistent links between SAE features and model behavior. Features with clear activation descriptions may have weak or unexpected causal effects; steering can vary across prompts or oppose the intended direction; and activation-based feature selection can miss features that produce the desired output change.

arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 22

Comparing Latent Concept Formation in State Space Models and Transformers via Sparse Autoencoders

The paper compares latent representations in Selective State Space Models (SSMs) like Mamba and Transformers such as Pythia using Sparse Autoencoders. Across a 10‑million token corpus, 99.98% of Mamba features align closely with Pythia’s, supporting the Universality Hypothesis that core semantic representations are similar across architectures. A tiny 0.02% of features diverge, with Mamba’s recurrent bottleneck causing it to compress syntactic anomalies into polysemantic neurons, whereas Pythia’s attention can isolate distinct formatting edge‑cases.

By Rithin Nagaraj, Rupa Laalasa Oruganti, Prerna Subhashchandra Kunder, Ashwini M Joshi