Unstable Features, Reproducible Subspaces: Understanding Seed Dependence in Sparse Autoencoders
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used to interpret neural network representations, but their utility depends on whether the learned features are reproducible across training runs. We study this question through feature stability: for each SAE feature, we estimate the probability that a similar feature reappears in an independently trained SAE. This yields a scalable per-feature signal that separates stable from unstable features. In a large-scale study across seeds, models, layers, dictionary sizes, and SAE variants, we find a pronounced functional asymmetry: stable features carry most of the reconstruction- and prediction-relevant signal, while unstable features have weak marginal impact and are dominated by low-frequency surface-form triggers in both activation statistics and automatic explanations. Geometrically, unstable features are individually non-reproducible but concentrate in reproducible lower-rank subspaces, suggesting that seed dependence often reflects basis ambiguity within a shared region of activation space rather than pure noise. A controlled synthetic model makes this mechanism explicit, showing that low-rank ground-truth features can be recovered at the subspace level while remaining non-identifiable as individual SAE latents across seeds. Finally, by pooling unique cross-seed features, we construct more stable SAEs while preserving explained variance in this setting. Together, these results show that unstable features are not merely failed or noisy latents: they have weak individual functional impact, but reflect reproducible low-dimensional structure that standard SAEs resolve differently across seeds.
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 16 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2026.
Builds on
16 of 29 references.
Closest ancestors · 9
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Capture Concept Manifolds?30 Apr
- 2025Enforcing Orderedness to Improve Feature Consistency1 Dec
- 2025Data Whitening Improves Sparse Autoencoder Learning17 Nov
- 2025Dimensional Collapse in Transformer Attention Outputs: A Challenge for Sparse Dictionary Learning23 Aug
- 2025Train One Sparse Autoencoder Across Multiple Sparsity Budgets to Preserve Interpretability and Accuracy30 May
- 2025Archetypal SAE: Adaptive and Stable Dictionary Learning for Concept Extraction in Large Vision Models18 Feb
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis7 Feb
- 2025Automated Interpretability Metrics Do Not Distinguish Trained and Random Transformers29 Jan
- 2024Mechanistic Permutability: Match Features Across Layers10 Oct
Other references · 7
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2024Jumping Ahead: Improving Reconstruction Fidelity with JumpReLU Sparse Autoencoderscited by 300
- 2025SAEBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Sparse Autoencoders in Language Model Interpretabilitycited by 124
- 2024Towards Universality: Studying Mechanistic Similarity Across Language Model Architecturescited by 31
- 2024Evolution of SAE Features Across Layers in LLMscited by 14
- 2025Analyze Feature Flow to Enhance Interpretation and Steering in Language Modelscited by 13
- 2025FaithfulSAE: Towards Capturing Faithful Features with Sparse Autoencoders without External Dataset Dependenciescited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Sanity Checks for Sparse Autoencoders: Do SAEs Beat Random Baselines?
- 2026From Geometric Recovery to Causal Validation: A Reproducible Audit of Sparse Autoencoder Features, from Superposition Geometry to Causal Inertness
- 2026Diminishing Returns of Data in Sparse Autoencoders: Functional Behavior does not Guarantee Feature Reproducibility
- 2026Aligned Training: A Parameter-Free Method to Improve Feature Quality and Stability of Sparse Autoencoders (SAE)
- 2026Toward Identifiable Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Features
- 2026Feature Starvation as Geometric Instability in Sparse Autoencoders
- 2026A Dominant Diffuse Phase in the Sparse Autoencoder Phase Diagram