How Do LLMs Encode Scientific Quality? An Empirical Study Using Monosemantic Features from Sparse Autoencoders
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In recent years, there has been a growing use of generative AI, and large language models (LLMs) in particular, to support both the assessment and generation of scientific work. Although some studies have shown that LLMs can, to a certain extent, evaluate research according to perceived quality, our understanding of the internal mechanisms that enable this capability remains limited. This paper presents the first study that investigates how LLMs encode the concept of scientific quality through relevant monosemantic features extracted using sparse autoencoders. We derive such features under different experimental settings and assess their ability to serve as predictors across three tasks related to research quality: predicting citation count, journal SJR, and journal h-index. The results indicate that LLMs encode features associated with multiple dimensions of scientific quality. In particular, we identify four recurring types of features that capture key aspects of how research quality is represented: 1) features reflecting research methodologies; 2) features related to publication type, with literature reviews typically exhibiting higher impact; 3) features associated with high-impact research fields and technologies; and 4) features corresponding to specific scientific jargons. These findings represent an important step toward understanding how LLMs encapsulate concepts related to research quality.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Feb 2026.
Builds on
14 of 33 references.
References · 14
- 2024A Survey on RAG Meeting LLMs: Towards Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Modelscited by 450
- 2024Gemma Scope: Open Sparse Autoencoders Everywhere All At Once on Gemma 2cited by 381
- 2024Automatically Interpreting Millions of Features in Large Language Modelscited by 106
- 2025A Survey on Sparse Autoencoders: Interpreting the Internal Mechanisms of Large Language Modelscited by 73
- 2020Building a PubMed knowledge graphcited by 38
- 2024Artificial Intelligence for Literature Reviews: Opportunities and Challengescited by 30
- 2025A Survey on Hypothesis Generation for Scientific Discovery in the Era of Large Language Modelscited by 17
- 2024Evaluating the Predictive Capacity of ChatGPT for Academic Peer Review Outcomes Across Multiple Platformscited by 11
- 2024Large Language Models for Scholarly Ontology Generation: An Extensive Analysis in the Engineering Fieldcited by 10
- 2024A Survey on Knowledge Organization Systems of Research Fields: Resources and Challengescited by 9
- 2019Reducing the Effort for Systematic Reviews in Software Engineeringcited by 3
- 2025Modelling and Classifying the Components of a Literature Reviewcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.