mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Sparse Autoencoders for Low-N Protein Function Prediction and Design

arXiv 2508.18567 ↗First posted 25 Aug 2025cs.LG q-bio.QMcited by 4

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Interpreting biomedical and science models

Abstract (arXiv)

Predicting protein function from amino acid sequence remains a central challenge in data-scarce (low-N) regimes, limiting machine learning-guided protein design when only small amounts of assay-labeled sequence-function data are available. Protein language models (pLMs) have advanced the field by providing evolutionary-informed embeddings and sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have enabled decomposition of these embeddings into interpretable latent variables that capture structural and functional features. However, the effectiveness of SAEs for low-N function prediction and protein design has not been systematically studied. Herein, we evaluate SAEs trained on fine-tuned ESM2 embeddings across diverse fitness extrapolation and protein engineering tasks. We show that SAEs, with as few as 24 sequences, consistently outperform or compete with their ESM2 baselines in fitness prediction, indicating that their sparse latent space encodes compact and biologically meaningful representations that generalize more effectively from limited data. Moreover, steering predictive latents exploits biological motifs in pLM representations, yielding top-fitness variants in 83% of cases compared to designing with ESM2 alone.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Interpreting biomedical and science models, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 7 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2025.

Builds on

7 of 35 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Towards Interpretable Protein Structure Prediction with Sparse Autoencoders11 Mar
  2. 2025Interpreting and Steering Protein Language Models through Sparse Autoencoders13 Feb
  3. 2024InterPLM: Discovering Interpretable Features in Protein Language Models via Sparse Autoencoders13 Nov

Other references · 4

  1. 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
  2. 2022Tranception: protein fitness prediction with autoregressive transformers and inference-time retrievalcited by 79
  3. 2024On Recovering Higher-order Interactions from Protein Language Modelscited by 10
  4. 2024SHAP zero Explains Biological Sequence Models with Near-zero Marginal Cost for Future Queriescited by 4

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. 2026Interpreting Latent Protein Language Model Features with Geometric Annotations
  2. 2025Evolutionary Profiles for Protein Fitness Prediction
  3. 2025Understanding protein function with a multimodal retrieval-augmented foundation model
  4. 2026Structural Interpretations of Protein Language Model Representations via Differentiable Graph Partitioning
  5. 2026Repurposing Protein Language Models for Latent Flow-Based Fitness Optimization
  6. 2026No Generation without Representation: Efficient Causal Protein Language Models Enable Zero-Shot Fitness Estimation
  7. 2026Generative modeling of intrinsically disordered protein regions by reinforcing sparse autoencoder features
  8. 2026Learning Latent Protein Languages for Autoregressive Generation