Interpretable Embeddings with Sparse Autoencoders: A Data Analysis Toolkit
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Analyzing large-scale text corpora is a core challenge in machine learning, crucial for tasks like identifying undesirable model behaviors or biases in training data. Current methods often rely on costly LLM-based techniques (e.g. annotating dataset differences) or dense embedding models (e.g. for clustering), which lack control over the properties of interest. We propose using sparse autoencoders (SAEs) to create SAE embeddings: representations whose dimensions map to interpretable concepts. Through four data analysis tasks, we show that SAE embeddings are more cost-effective and reliable than LLMs and more controllable than dense embeddings. Using the large hypothesis space of SAEs, we can uncover insights such as (1) semantic differences between datasets and (2) unexpected concept correlations in documents. For instance, by comparing model responses, we find that Grok-4 clarifies ambiguities more often than nine other frontier models. Relative to LLMs, SAE embeddings uncover bigger differences at 2-8x lower cost and identify biases more reliably. Additionally, SAE embeddings are controllable: by filtering concepts, we can (3) cluster documents along axes of interest and (4) outperform dense embeddings on property-based retrieval. Using SAE embeddings, we study model behavior with two case studies: investigating how OpenAI model behavior has changed over time and finding "trigger" phrases learned by Tulu-3 (Lambert et al., 2024) from its training data. These results position SAEs as a versatile tool for unstructured data analysis and highlight the neglected importance of interpreting models through their data.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 10 Dec 2025.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.
9 papers.
- 2026Language Model Circuits Are Sparse in the Neuron Basiscited by 18
- 2026Shaping capabilities with token-level data filteringcited by 11
- 2026Chunky Post-Training: Data Driven Failures of Generalizationcited by 3
- 2026Simple LLM Baselines are Competitive for Model Diffingcited by 3
- 2026Automatically Finding Reward Model Biasescited by 3
- 2026Data-Centric Interpretability for LLM-based Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 1
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Learn Meaningful Concept Hierarchies?cited by 1
- 2026Analysing LLM Persona Generation and Fairness Interpretation in Polarised Geopolitical Contextscited by 0
- 2026RouterInterp: Understanding Superposed Specialisation in Mixture of Experts Routingcited by 0
- 2026RouterInterp: Understanding Superposed Specialisation in Mixture of Experts Routing8 Oct 2026
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Learn Meaningful Concept Hierarchies?22 Jun 2026
- 2026Analysing LLM Persona Generation and Fairness Interpretation in Polarised Geopolitical Contexts24 Mar 2026
- 2026Automatically Finding Reward Model Biases16 Feb 2026
- 2026Simple LLM Baselines are Competitive for Model Diffing10 Feb 2026
- 2026Chunky Post-Training: Data Driven Failures of Generalization5 Feb 2026
- 2026Data-Centric Interpretability for LLM-based Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning5 Feb 2026
- 2026Language Model Circuits Are Sparse in the Neuron Basis30 Jan 2026
- 2026Shaping capabilities with token-level data filtering29 Jan 2026