Causal Interpretation of Sparse Autoencoder Features in Vision
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding what sparse auto-encoder (SAE) features in vision transformers truly represent is usually done by inspecting the patches where a feature's activation is highest. However, self-attention mixes information across the entire image, so an activated patch often co-occurs with-but does not cause-the feature's firing. We propose Causal Feature Explanation (CaFE), which leverages Effective Receptive Field (ERF). We consider each activation of an SAE feature to be a target and apply input-attribution methods to identify the image patches that causally drive that activation. Across CLIP-ViT features, ERF maps frequently diverge from naive activation maps, revealing hidden context dependencies (e.g., a "roaring face" feature that requires the co-occurrence of eyes and nose, rather than merely an open mouth). Patch insertion tests confirm that CaFE more effectively recovers or suppresses feature activations than activation-ranked patches. Our results show that CaFE yields more faithful and semantically precise explanations of vision-SAE features, highlighting the risk of misinterpretation when relying solely on activation location.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Aug 2025.
Builds on
11 of 11 references.
References · 11
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,359
- 2022Reproducible scaling laws for contrastive language-image learningcited by 1,163
- 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
- 2024AttnLRP: Attention-Aware Layer-Wise Relevance Propagation for Transformerscited by 116
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Learn Monosemantic Features in Vision-Language Modelscited by 70
- 2024Sparse autoencoders reveal selective remapping of visual concepts during adaptationcited by 66
- 2025Interpreting CLIP with Hierarchical Sparse Autoencoderscited by 54
- 2025Interpretable and Testable Vision Features via Sparse Autoencoderscited by 24
- 2024Respect the model: Fine-grained and Robust Explanation with Sharing Ratio Decompositioncited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Beyond Semantics: Disentangling Information Scope in Sparse Autoencoders for CLIPcited by 1
- 2026Sparse Autoencoders enable Robust and Interpretable Fine-tuning of CLIP modelscited by 0
- 2026When Structured Sparse Autoencoders Learn Consistent Concepts Across Modalitiescited by 0
- 2026Verifying the Linear Representation Hypothesis: How Interpretable Are Vision SAEs?cited by 0
- 2026Verifying the Linear Representation Hypothesis: How Interpretable Are Vision SAEs?28 Sep 2026
- 2026When Structured Sparse Autoencoders Learn Consistent Concepts Across Modalities9 Jul 2026
- 2026Sparse Autoencoders enable Robust and Interpretable Fine-tuning of CLIP models15 May 2026
- 2026Beyond Semantics: Disentangling Information Scope in Sparse Autoencoders for CLIP7 Apr 2026