Toward Identifiable Sparse Autoencoders
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Recently, sparse autoencoders (SAEs) have emerged as an attractive tool for interpreting and interacting with representations in practical neural networks. While it is common empirical folklore, we also show theoretically that SAEs are highly unstable: different training runs are likely to produce different concept dictionaries and sparse codes. We characterize the model properties that hinder the stability of real-world SAEs, and address each of these problems through minimal changes to the architecture and training procedure. Together, these changes yield two versions of an identifiable SAE (iSAE), a variant of the standard TopK SAE with lower reconstruction error and improved stability. We explain this improvement theoretically by connecting SAEs with traditional dictionary learning approaches, and show that the dictionaries learned in practice satisfy an approximate restricted isometry condition, rendering the corresponding sparse codes in those models near-identifiable.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 17 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2026.
Builds on
17 of 33 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Position: Mechanistic Interpretability Should Prioritize Feature Consistency in SAEs26 May
- 2025Archetypal SAE: Adaptive and Stable Dictionary Learning for Concept Extraction in Large Vision Models18 Feb
Other references · 15
- 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,974
- 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2018Challenging Common Assumptions in the Unsupervised Learning of Disentangled Representationscited by 941
- 2023Steering Language Models With Activation Engineeringcited by 922
- 2013k-Sparse Autoencoderscited by 215
- 2025SAEBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Sparse Autoencoders in Language Model Interpretabilitycited by 124
- 2024Steering Language Model Refusal with Sparse Autoencoderscited by 95
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Featurescited by 93
- 2016A note on the sample complexity of the Er-SpUD algorithm by Spielman, Wang and Wright for exact recovery of sparsely used dictionariescited by 26
- 2025Evaluating Adversarial Robustness of Concept Representations in Sparse Autoencoderscited by 12
- 2025AbsTopK: Rethinking Sparse Autoencoders For Bidirectional Featurescited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025SplInterp: Improving our Understanding and Training of Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025Empirical Evaluation of Progressive Coding for Sparse Autoencoders
- 2024Compute Optimal Inference and Provable Amortisation Gap in Sparse Autoencoders
- 2026Feature Starvation as Geometric Instability in Sparse Autoencoders
- 2026Sanity Checks for Sparse Autoencoders: Do SAEs Beat Random Baselines?
- 2025Enforcing Orderedness to Improve Feature Consistency
- 2025Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders: From Shallow Design to Matching Pursuit
- 2025Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders