A Geometric View for Understanding Concept Learning and Neuron Interpretation in Sparse Autoencoders
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
We propose a unified mathematical framework for a geometric understanding of concept learning and neuron interpretation in sparse autoencoders (SAEs). While SAEs improve interpretability of neural networks by learning sparse feature representations, a principled definition of ''concept'' and ''learning'' remains unclear. We formalize concepts as sets of data points and cast concept learning as a set-alignment problem between human-defined and model-induced concepts. This formulation distinguishes three increasingly strong notions of learning -- detection, separation, and approximation -- and yields geometric conditions, error bounds, and capacity constraints for when concepts can be represented by individual neurons or multi-neuron units. It also provides a set-theoretic account for common SAE phenomena, including feature splitting, feature absorption, feature families, and hierarchical concepts. Finally, we connect concept learning and neuron interpretation through formal concept analysis, showing that the two directions need not agree and that their many-to-many structure can be organized by concept lattices. Experiments on synthetic data with ReLU and Top-K SAEs illustrate the theory and reveal the effects of SAE size and sparsity on concept learning.
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 32 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jun 2026.
Builds on
32 of 49 references.
Closest ancestors · 7
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Capture Concept Manifolds?30 Apr
- 2025A Geometric Unification of Concept Learning with Concept Cones8 Dec
- 2025Understanding sparse autoencoder scaling in the presence of feature manifolds2 Sep
- 2025From Flat to Hierarchical: Extracting Sparse Representations with Matching Pursuit3 Jun
- 2025Projecting Assumptions: The Duality Between Sparse Autoencoders and Concept Geometry3 Mar
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis7 Feb
- 2022Toy Models of Superposition21 Sep
Other references · 25
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,032
- 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
- 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
- 2014On the Number of Linear Regions of Deep Neural Networkscited by 381
- 2023Finding Neurons in a Haystack: Case Studies with Sparse Probingcited by 334
- 2024Jumping Ahead: Improving Reconstruction Fidelity with JumpReLU Sparse Autoencoderscited by 300
- 2024Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Modelscited by 199
- 2026Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnetcited by 191
- 2024Improving Dictionary Learning with Gated Sparse Autoencoderscited by 179
- 2024A is for Absorption: Studying Feature Splitting and Absorption in Sparse Autoencoderscited by 160
13 more
- 2013On the number of response regions of deep feed forward networks with piece-wise linear activationscited by 94
- 2024InterPLM: Discovering Interpretable Features in Protein Language Models via Sparse Autoencoderscited by 66
- 2023Explaining black box text modules in natural language with language modelscited by 62
- 2025Language Models are Injective and Hence Invertiblecited by 35
- 2024Disentangling Dense Embeddings with Sparse Autoencoderscited by 23
- 2017Forward-Backward Selection with Early Droppingcited by 18
- 2025Because we have LLMs, we Can and Should Pursue Agentic Interpretabilitycited by 16
- 2026The Shape of Beliefs: Geometry, Dynamics, and Interventions along Representation Manifolds of Language Models' Posteriorscited by 15
- 2025Incorporating Hierarchical Semantics in Sparse Autoencoder Architecturescited by 14
- 2026From Directions to Regions: Decomposing Activations in Language Models via Local Geometrycited by 12
- 2025A Mathematical Philosophy of Explanations in Mechanistic Interpretability -- The Strange Science Part I.icited by 6
- 2025Evaluating Neuron Explanations: A Unified Framework with Sanity Checkscited by 4
- 2026Sparsity is Combinatorial Depth: Quantifying MoE Expressivity via Tropical Geometrycited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Interpretable and Steerable Concept Bottleneck Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025Mechanistic Interpretability with Sparse Autoencoder Neural Operators
- 2025Concept-SAE: A Controllable and Invertible Concept Interface for Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025The Deleuzian Representation Hypothesis
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Learn Meaningful Concept Hierarchies?
- 2025Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025Universal Sparse Autoencoders: Interpretable Cross-Model Concept Alignment
- 2025Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders for Monosemantic Representation