mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Similarity of Neural Network Representations in Superposition

arXiv 2604.00208 ↗First posted 31 Mar 2026cs.LGcited by 0

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Comparing internal representations is a central goal in neuroscience and machine learning, but standard linear alignment metrics (Representational Similarity Analysis, Centered Kernel Alignment, and linear regression) are frequently applied to neural activity coordinates rather than on the underlying features. We show this matters when neural systems operate in superposition, encoding more features than they have neurons via linear compression. Closed-form derivations prove that these metrics depend on the Gram matrices of each system's projection, not on the latent features themselves: alignment thus combines what a system represents with how it is encoded. For those interested in what features two systems share, this is a problem: Two networks can have identical feature content yet appear more dissimilar than networks exhibiting partial feature overlap. This apparent misalignment need not reflect lost information as compressed sensing guarantees sparse features remain recoverable from the compressed activity. We confirm this by training supervised TopK sparse autoencoders that realize solvable compressed sensing by construction, finding alignment on recovered latents restored even when raw-activation alignment remains deflated. We extend the result to unsupervised SAEs trained without ground-truth latents, and to pretrained vision and language model SAEs, where SAE-latent alignment exceeds raw-activation alignment, consistent with superposition in real systems.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 22 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Mar 2026.

Builds on

22 of 41 references.

Closest ancestors · 7

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Superposition disentanglement of neural representations reveals hidden alignment3 Oct
  2. 2025Archetypal SAE: Adaptive and Stable Dictionary Learning for Concept Extraction in Large Vision Models18 Feb
  3. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis7 Feb
  4. 2024Compute Optimal Inference and Provable Amortisation Gap in Sparse Autoencoders20 Nov
  5. 2024On the Complexity of Neural Computation in Superposition5 Sep
  6. 2024Mathematical Models of Computation in Superposition10 Aug
  7. 2022Toy Models of Superposition21 Sep

Other references · 15

  1. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
  2. 2019Similarity of Neural Network Representations Revisitedcited by 1,755
  3. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  4. 2024The Platonic Representation Hypothesiscited by 382
  5. 2016Linear Algebraic Structure of Word Senses, with Applications to Polysemycited by 165
  6. 2024A is for Absorption: Studying Feature Splitting and Absorption in Sparse Autoencoderscited by 160
  7. 2023Getting aligned on representational alignmentcited by 143
  8. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Featurescited by 93
  9. 2014Deep Neural Networks Rival the Representation of Primate IT Cortex for Core Visual Object Recognitioncited by 50
  10. 2026Revisiting the Platonic Representation Hypothesis: An Aristotelian Viewcited by 44
  11. 2024Cross-Entropy Is All You Need To Invert the Data Generating Processcited by 31
  12. 2025From superposition to sparse codes: interpretable representations in neural networkscited by 16
3 more
  1. 2026How Many Features Can a Language Model Store Under the Linear Representation Hypothesis?cited by 12
  2. 2023Identifying Interpretable Visual Features in Artificial and Biological Neural Systemscited by 9
  3. 2025Position: An Empirically Grounded Identifiability Theory Will Accelerate Self-Supervised Learning Researchcited by 9

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Superposition as Lossy Compression: Measure with Sparse Autoencoders and Connect to Adversarial Vulnerability
  2. 2026Feature Superposition in Neural Networks: From Theory to Practice
  3. 2026Compressed Computation under L4 Loss is likely Computation in Superposition
  4. 2026From Geometric Recovery to Causal Validation: A Reproducible Audit of Sparse Autoencoder Features, from Superposition Geometry to Causal Inertness
  5. 2025Model Alignment Search
  6. 2025Equivariant Sparse Autoencoders: Mechanistic Interpretability of Neural Networks on Symmetric Data
  7. 2024Interpretability as Compression: Reconsidering SAE Explanations of Neural Activations with MDL-SAEs
  8. 2026The Triangle of Similarity: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Comparing Neural Network Representations