mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Aligned Training: A Parameter-Free Method to Improve Feature Quality and Stability of Sparse Autoencoders (SAE)

arXiv 2605.18629 ↗First posted 18 May 2026cs.LGcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are one of the main methods to interpret the inner workings of deep neural networks (DNNs), decomposing activations into higher-dimensional features. However, they exhibit critical shortcomings where a large fraction of features are never activated and are unstable. Despite variants of SAEs that attempt to mitigate these issues, they require additional data, resampling, or training. We propose the aligned training, a parameter-free reparameterization of SAEs that simultaneously improves reconstruction quality, eliminates dead features, and significantly enhances stability across training seeds. Our approach is motivated by an overlooked observation that SAE feature quality, measured by the inner product between encoder and decoder directions (which we call the alignment score), follows a bimodal distribution across all modern architectures. The proposed aligned training enforces a geometric constraint between the encoder and decoder such that their inner product equals one for every feature, which removes a source of degeneracy in the SAE training without adding any hyperparameters. Across multiple models, dictionary sizes, and sparsity levels, the aligned training shows Pareto improvements on the SAEBench benchmarks. Beyond improving dead features, stability and reconstruction, our method readily integrates with techniques in mechanical interpretability such as Top/BatchTop-K architectures and p-Annealing. Overall, the aligned training substantially improves feature quality and stability of SAE without computational complexity or cost.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 15 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.

Builds on

15 of 32 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Position: Mechanistic Interpretability Should Prioritize Feature Consistency in SAEs26 May
  2. 2025Archetypal SAE: Adaptive and Stable Dictionary Learning for Concept Extraction in Large Vision Models18 Feb
  3. 2024Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders on Targeted Concept Erasure Tasks28 Nov
  4. 2024Enhancing Neural Network Interpretability with Feature-Aligned Sparse Autoencoders2 Nov
  5. 2022Toy Models of Superposition21 Sep

Other references · 10

  1. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  2. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  3. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  4. 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
  5. 2024Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Modelscited by 435
  6. 2024Jumping Ahead: Improving Reconstruction Fidelity with JumpReLU Sparse Autoencoderscited by 300
  7. 2024BatchTopK Sparse Autoencoderscited by 130
  8. 2025SAEBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Sparse Autoencoders in Language Model Interpretabilitycited by 124
  9. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Featurescited by 93
  10. 2024Measuring Progress in Dictionary Learning for Language Model Interpretability with Board Game Modelscited by 51

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025SplInterp: Improving our Understanding and Training of Sparse Autoencoders
  2. 2026From Geometric Recovery to Causal Validation: A Reproducible Audit of Sparse Autoencoder Features, from Superposition Geometry to Causal Inertness
  3. 2026Sanity Checks for Sparse Autoencoders: Do SAEs Beat Random Baselines?
  4. 2026Toward Identifiable Sparse Autoencoders
  5. 2026MetaSAEs: Joint Training with a Decomposability Penalty Produces More Atomic Sparse Autoencoder Latents
  6. 2026Diminishing Returns of Data in Sparse Autoencoders: Functional Behavior does not Guarantee Feature Reproducibility
  7. 2025Breaking the Block: Preserving Data Continuity to Train Superior SAEs for Instruct Models
  8. 2026Size Doesn't Matter: Cosine-Scored Sparse Autoencoders