mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders for Monosemantic Representation

arXiv 2508.15094 ↗First posted 20 Aug 2025cs.LGcited by 4

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → SAE features and their applications

Abstract (arXiv)

A key barrier to interpreting large language models is polysemanticity, where neurons activate for multiple unrelated concepts. Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have been proposed to mitigate this issue by transforming dense activations into sparse, more interpretable features. While prior work suggests that SAEs promote monosemanticity, no quantitative comparison has examined how concept activation distributions differ between SAEs and their base models. This paper provides the first systematic evaluation of SAEs against base models through activation distribution lens. We introduce a fine-grained concept separability score based on the Jensen-Shannon distance, which captures how distinctly a neuron's activation distributions vary across concepts. Using two large language models (Gemma-2-2B and DeepSeek-R1) and multiple SAE variants across five datasets (including word-level and sentence-level), we show that SAEs reduce polysemanticity and achieve higher concept separability. To assess practical utility, we evaluate concept-level interventions using two strategies: full neuron masking and partial suppression. We find that, compared to base models, SAEs enable more precise concept-level control when using partial suppression. Building on this, we propose Attenuation via Posterior Probabilities (APP), a new intervention method that uses concept-conditioned activation distributions for targeted suppression. APP achieves the smallest perplexity increase while remaining highly effective at concept removal.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in SAE features and their applications, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 34 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2025.

Builds on

34 of 52 references.

Closest ancestors · 9

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Dense SAE Latents Are Features, Not Bugs18 Jun
  2. 2025SAEs Are Good for Steering -- If You Select the Right Features26 May
  3. 2025SAE-SSV: Supervised Steering in Sparse Representation Spaces for Reliable Control of Language Models22 May
  4. 2025Are Sparse Autoencoders Useful? A Case Study in Sparse Probing23 Feb
  5. 2025SAIF: A Sparse Autoencoder Framework for Interpreting and Steering Instruction Following of Language Models17 Feb
  6. 2025Rethinking Evaluation of Sparse Autoencoders through the Representation of Polysemous Words9 Jan
  7. 2024Jumping Ahead: Improving Reconstruction Fidelity with JumpReLU Sparse Autoencoders19 Jul
  8. 2024Improving Dictionary Learning with Gated Sparse Autoencoders24 Apr
  9. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Models15 Sep

Other references · 25

  1. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  2. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
  3. 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,330
  4. 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
  5. 2022Mass-Editing Memory in a Transformercited by 1,001
  6. 2017Network Dissection: Quantifying Interpretability of Deep Visual Representationscited by 708
  7. 2024Mechanistic Interpretability for AI Safety -- A Reviewcited by 422
  8. 2024Gemma Scope: Open Sparse Autoencoders Everywhere All At Once on Gemma 2cited by 394
  9. 2021Few-NERD: A Few-Shot Named Entity Recognition Datasetcited by 152
  10. 2018What Is One Grain of Sand in the Desert? Analyzing Individual Neurons in Deep NLP Modelscited by 124
  11. 2016Multifaceted Feature Visualization: Uncovering the Different Types of Features Learned By Each Neuron in Deep Neural Networkscited by 106
  12. 2018On the importance of single directions for generalizationcited by 99
13 more
  1. 2022Polysemanticity and Capacity in Neural Networkscited by 77
  2. 2024Large language models surpass human experts in predicting neuroscience resultscited by 69
  3. 2024Controlling Language and Diffusion Models by Transporting Activationscited by 68
  4. 2024Identifying Functionally Important Features with End-to-End Sparse Dictionary Learningcited by 67
  5. 2021On the Pitfalls of Analyzing Individual Neurons in Language Modelscited by 62
  6. 2025Steering Large Language Model Activations in Sparse Spacescited by 58
  7. 2024Whispering Experts: Neural Interventions for Toxicity Mitigation in Language Modelscited by 32
  8. 2018NeuroX: A Toolkit for Analyzing Individual Neurons in Neural Networkscited by 31
  9. 2025HyperSteer: Activation Steering at Scale with Hypernetworkscited by 23
  10. 2023What Causes Polysemanticity? An Alternative Origin Story of Mixed Selectivity from Incidental Causescited by 19
  11. 2024Understanding polysemanticity in neural networks through coding theorycited by 17
  12. 2025Neurons Speak in Ranges: Breaking Free from Discrete Neuronal Attributioncited by 5
  13. 2025TabNSA: Native Sparse Attention for Efficient Tabular Data Learningcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Can Capture Language-Specific Concepts Across Diverse Languages
  2. 2026MonoLoss: A Training Objective for Interpretable Monosemantic Representations
  3. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Learn Monosemantic Features in Vision-Language Models
  4. 2025On the Limits of Sparse Autoencoders: A Theoretical Framework and Reweighted Remedy
  5. 2025A Survey on Sparse Autoencoders: Interpreting the Internal Mechanisms of Large Language Models
  6. 2025Measuring and Guiding Monosemanticity
  7. 2025Unveiling Language-Specific Features in Large Language Models via Sparse Autoencoders
  8. 2025Sparse Shift Autoencoders for Identifying Concepts from Large Language Model Activations