mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SplInterp: Improving our Understanding and Training of Sparse Autoencoders

arXiv 2505.11836 ↗First posted 17 May 2025cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have received considerable recent attention as tools for mechanistic interpretability, showing success at extracting interpretable features even from very large LLMs. However, this research has been largely empirical, and there have been recent doubts about the true utility of SAEs. In this work, we seek to enhance the theoretical understanding of SAEs, using the spline theory of deep learning. By situating SAEs in this framework: we discover that SAEs generalise ``k-means autoencoders'' to be piecewise affine, but sacrifice accuracy for interpretability vs. the optimal ``k-means-esque plus local principal component analysis (PCA)'' piecewise affine autoencoder. We characterise the underlying geometry of (TopK) SAEs using power diagrams. And we develop a novel proximal alternating method SGD (PAM-SGD) algorithm for training SAEs, with both solid theoretical foundations and promising empirical results in MNIST and LLM experiments, particularly in sample efficiency and (in the LLM setting) improved sparsity of codes. All code is available at: https://github.com/splInterp2025/splInterp

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 11 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 May 2025.

Builds on

11 of 23 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Projecting Assumptions: The Duality Between Sparse Autoencoders and Concept Geometry3 Mar
  2. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis7 Feb
  3. 2025Automated Interpretability Metrics Do Not Distinguish Trained and Random Transformers29 Jan
  4. 2022Toy Models of Superposition21 Sep

Other references · 7

  1. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  2. 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 629
  3. 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
  4. 2024Jumping Ahead: Improving Reconstruction Fidelity with JumpReLU Sparse Autoencoderscited by 300
  5. 2013k-Sparse Autoencoderscited by 215
  6. 2024Deep Networks Always Grok and Here is Whycited by 51
  7. 2016Calculus of the exponent of Kurdyka-Lojasiewicz inequality and its applications to linear convergence of first-order methodscited by 35

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Sanity Checks for Sparse Autoencoders: Do SAEs Beat Random Baselines?
  2. 2025Sparse Autoencoders, Again?
  3. 2026Toward Identifiable Sparse Autoencoders
  4. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Features
  5. 2025Empirical Evaluation of Progressive Coding for Sparse Autoencoders
  6. 2025Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders: From Shallow Design to Matching Pursuit
  7. 2025Evaluating and Designing Sparse Autoencoders by Approximating Quasi-Orthogonality
  8. 2024Compute Optimal Inference and Provable Amortisation Gap in Sparse Autoencoders