mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Feature Integration Spaces: Joint Training Reveals Dual Encoding in Neural Network Representations

arXiv 2507.00269 ↗First posted 30 Jun 2025q-bio.NC cs.AIcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Current sparse autoencoder (SAE) approaches to neural network interpretability assume that activations can be decomposed through linear superposition into sparse, interpretable features. Despite high reconstruction fidelity, SAEs consistently fail to eliminate polysemanticity and exhibit pathological behavioral errors. We propose that neural networks encode information in two complementary spaces compressed into the same substrate: feature identity and feature integration. To test this dual encoding hypothesis, we develop sequential and joint-training architectures to capture identity and integration patterns simultaneously. Joint training achieves 41.3% reconstruction improvement and 51.6% reduction in KL divergence errors. This architecture spontaneously develops bimodal feature organization: low squared norm features contributing to integration pathways and the rest contributing directly to the residual. Small nonlinear components (3% of parameters) achieve 16.5% standalone improvements, demonstrating parameter-efficient capture of computational relationships crucial for behavior. Additionally, intervention experiments using 2x2 factorial stimulus designs demonstrated that integration features exhibit selective sensitivity to experimental manipulations and produce systematic behavioral effects on model outputs, including significant statistical interaction effects across semantic dimensions. This work provides systematic evidence for (1) dual encoding in neural representations, (2) meaningful nonlinearly encoded feature interactions, and (3) introduces an architectural paradigm shift from post-hoc feature analysis to integrated computational design, establishing foundations for next-generation SAEs.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 5 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jun 2025.

Builds on

5 of 16 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Decomposing The Dark Matter of Sparse Autoencoders18 Oct
  2. 2024Towards Principled Evaluations of Sparse Autoencoders for Interpretability and Control14 May

Other references · 3

  1. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  2. 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 767
  3. 2025Taming Polysemanticity in LLMs: Provable Feature Recovery via Sparse Autoencoderscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026From Input to Output: A Flexible Agent for Dual-End Interpretation of Sparse Autoencoder Features
  2. 2025Sparsification and Reconstruction from the Perspective of Representation Geometry
  3. 2025Projecting Assumptions: The Duality Between Sparse Autoencoders and Concept Geometry
  4. 2024Interpreting Attention Layer Outputs with Sparse Autoencoders
  5. 2024Quantifying Feature Space Universality Across Large Language Models via Sparse Autoencoders
  6. 2025From superposition to sparse codes: interpretable representations in neural networks
  7. 2024Interpretability as Compression: Reconsidering SAE Explanations of Neural Activations with MDL-SAEs
  8. 2025Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders for Monosemantic Representation