# Are Sparse Autoencoder Benchmarks Reliable?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.18229 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.18229/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in SAE features and their applications, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability.
- Builds on 26 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.

## Placed in

- Mechanistic interpretability / [SAE features and their applications](https://mlsanity.com/mechinterp/sae-features-and-their-applications/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.00027/) (2020)
- [Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.08600/) (2023)
- [Toy Models of Superposition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.10652/) (2022)
- [Deep Reinforcement Learning that Matters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.06560/) (2017)
- [Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19647/) (2024)
- [Gemma Scope: Open Sparse Autoencoders Everywhere All At Once on Gemma 2](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.05147/) (2024)
- [Finding Neurons in a Haystack: Case Studies with Sparse Probing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01610/) (2023)
- [AxBench: Steering LLMs? Even Simple Baselines Outperform Sparse Autoencoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.17148/) (2025)
- [What Will it Take to Fix Benchmarking in Natural Language Understanding?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.02145/) (2021)
- [A is for Absorption: Studying Feature Splitting and Absorption in Sparse Autoencoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.14507/) (2024)
- [Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.17547/) (2025)
- [With Little Power Comes Great Responsibility](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.06595/) (2020)
- [The Benchmark Lottery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.07002/) (2021)
- [BatchTopK Sparse Autoencoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06410/) (2024)
- [SAEBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Sparse Autoencoders in Language Model Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09532/) (2025)
- [Are Sparse Autoencoders Useful? A Case Study in Sparse Probing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.16681/) (2025)
- [Automatically Interpreting Millions of Features in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.13928/) (2024)
- [Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16615/) (2025)
- [Towards Principled Evaluations of Sparse Autoencoders for Interpretability and Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.08366/) (2024)
- [RAVEL: Evaluating Interpretability Methods on Disentangling Language Model Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.17700/) (2024)
- [Reporting Score Distributions Makes a Difference: Performance Study of LSTM-networks for Sequence Tagging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.09861/) (2017)
- [Measuring Progress in Dictionary Learning for Language Model Interpretability with Board Game Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00113/) (2024)
- [Compute Optimal Inference and Provable Amortisation Gap in Sparse Autoencoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.13117/) (2024)
- [Position: Mechanistic Interpretability Should Prioritize Feature Consistency in SAEs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20254/) (2025)
- [Sanity Checks for Sparse Autoencoders: Do SAEs Beat Random Baselines?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14111/) (2026)
- [SynthSAEBench: Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders on Scalable Realistic Synthetic Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14687/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [ICA Lens: Interpreting Language Models Without Training Another Dictionary](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.11722/) (2026)
- [SAEScientist-Bench: Can AI Agents Conduct Autonomous SAE Interpretability Research?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.09113/) (2026)
- [Representational Simplicity and Circuit Size Dissociate in a Threshold-Dependent Way: A Controlled Test via Adversarial Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.35890/) (2026)
- [SFT Leaves a Reproducible Signature in Activation Geometry: Calibrating Post-Training Interpretability Against Run-to-Run Noise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.17093/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are a core interpretability tool for large language models, and progress on SAE architectures depends on benchmarks that reliably distinguish better SAEs from worse ones. We audit the SAE quality metrics in SAEBench, the de-facto standard SAE evaluation suite, through three complementary lenses: reseed noise on a fixed SAE, ground-truth correlation on synthetic SAEs, and discriminability across training trajectories. We find that two of these metrics, Targeted Probe Perturbation (TPP) and Spurious Correlation Removal (SCR), fail multiple lenses at their canonical settings and should not be used to evaluate SAEs. The other metrics show higher reseed noise and lower discriminability than the field assumes. The sae-probes variant of k-sparse probing is the most reliable metric we tested, but even sae-probes struggles to separate variants of the same SAE architecture. Our results show the field needs better SAE benchmarks.