mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Prune, Interpret, Evaluate: A Cross-Layer Transcoder-Native Framework for Efficient Circuit Discovery via Feature Attribution

arXiv 2604.16889 ↗First posted 18 Apr 2026cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Existing feature-interpretation pipelines typically operate on uniformly sampled units or exhaustive feature sets, incurring massive costs on units irrelevant to target behaviors. To address this, we introduce the first CLT-native end-to-end pruning framework, PIE, which pioneers the paradigm of pruning first and interpreting later. PIE connects Pruning, automatic Interpretation, and interpretation Evaluation, establishing a comprehensive benchmarking environment to systematically measure behavioral fidelity and downstream interpretability under pruning. Within this framework, we adapt strong relevance baselines and propose Feature Attribution Patching (FAP), a patch-grounded attribution method that scores CLT features by aggregating gradient-weighted write contributions. Furthermore, we introduce FAP-Synergy, a systematic synergy-aware reranking procedure. We evaluate pruning using KL-divergence behavior retention and assess interpretation quality with FADE-style metrics across IOI and Doc-String datasets. Across budget constraints of K in {50, 100, 200, 400, 800}, our rigorous benchmarking reveals distinct operational regimes: while base FAP and adapted baselines perform robustly at relaxed budgets, FAP-Synergy excels in highly constrained, strict-budget regimes. Crucially, we demonstrate a practical "Effective Budget" advantage: on the IOI task for both Llama-3.2-1B and Gemma-2-2B, FAP-Synergy at K=50 functionally matches the behavioral fidelity of baseline circuits at K=75. Because downstream evaluation costs scale linearly per feature, Synergy effectively grants the pipeline 25 "free" features, achieving K=75 fidelity while reducing interpretation costs by 33%.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Apr 2026.

Builds on

14 of 33 references.

References · 14

  1. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,130
  2. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 928
  3. 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 700
  4. 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 599
  5. 2023Attribution Patching Outperforms Automated Circuit Discoverycited by 196
  6. 2024Transcoders Find Interpretable LLM Feature Circuitscited by 186
  7. 2024Have Faith in Faithfulness: Going Beyond Circuit Overlap When Finding Model Mechanismscited by 144
  8. 2024Automatically Interpreting Millions of Features in Large Language Modelscited by 106
  9. 2021Unbox the Black-box for the Medical Explainable AI via Multi-modal and Multi-centre Data Fusion: A Mini-Review, Two Showcases and Beyondcited by 75
  10. 2024Towards Understanding Safety Alignment: A Mechanistic Perspective from Safety Neuronscited by 47
  11. 2023Rigorously Assessing Natural Language Explanations of Neuronscited by 44
  12. 2025Enhancing Automated Interpretability with Output-Centric Feature Descriptionscited by 39
2 more
  1. 2025FADE: Why Bad Descriptions Happen to Good Featurescited by 13
  2. 2025Semantic Regexes: Auto-Interpreting LLM Features with a Structured Languagecited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.