The Persian Rug: solving toy models of superposition using large-scale symmetries
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
We present a complete mechanistic description of the algorithm learned by a minimal non-linear sparse data autoencoder in the limit of large input dimension. The model, originally presented in arXiv:2209.10652, compresses sparse data vectors through a linear layer and decompresses using another linear layer followed by a ReLU activation. We notice that when the data is permutation symmetric (no input feature is privileged) large models reliably learn an algorithm that is sensitive to individual weights only through their large-scale statistics. For these models, the loss function becomes analytically tractable. Using this understanding, we give the explicit scalings of the loss at high sparsity, and show that the model is near-optimal among recently proposed architectures. In particular, changing or adding to the activation function any elementwise or filtering operation can at best improve the model's performance by a constant factor. Finally, we forward-engineer a model with the requisite symmetries and show that its loss precisely matches that of the trained models. Unlike the trained model weights, the low randomness in the artificial weights results in miraculous fractal structures resembling a Persian rug, to which the algorithm is oblivious. Our work contributes to neural network interpretability by introducing techniques for understanding the structure of autoencoders. Code to reproduce our results can be found at https://github.com/KfirD/PersianRug .
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 11 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2024.
Builds on
11 of 28 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Gemma Scope: Open Sparse Autoencoders Everywhere All At Once on Gemma 29 Aug
- 2023Dynamical versus Bayesian Phase Transitions in a Toy Model of Superposition10 Oct
Other references · 9
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
- 2024Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Modelscited by 435
- 2013k-Sparse Autoencoderscited by 215
- 2024Improving Dictionary Learning with Gated Sparse Autoencoderscited by 179
- 2019Loss Landscapes of Regularized Linear Autoencoderscited by 46
- 2018From Principal Subspaces to Principal Components with Linear Autoencoderscited by 39
- 2014Zero-bias autoencoders and the benefits of co-adapting featurescited by 15
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Equivariant Sparse Autoencoders: Mechanistic Interpretability of Neural Networks on Symmetric Data
- 2026MetaSAEs: Joint Training with a Decomposability Penalty Produces More Atomic Sparse Autoencoder Latents
- 2026Compressed Computation is (probably) not Computation in Superposition
- 2026Compressed Computation under L4 Loss is likely Computation in Superposition
- 2026Subspace-Aware Sparse Autoencoders for Effective Mechanistic Interpretability
- 2024Compression of Structured Data with Autoencoders: Provable Benefit of Nonlinearities and Depth
- 2026From Geometric Recovery to Causal Validation: A Reproducible Audit of Sparse Autoencoder Features, from Superposition Geometry to Causal Inertness
- 2025Superposition as Lossy Compression: Measure with Sparse Autoencoders and Connect to Adversarial Vulnerability