mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Compressed Computation is (probably) not Computation in Superposition

arXiv 2606.14673 ↗First posted 12 Jun 2026cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We study whether the Compressed Computation (CC) toy model (Braun et al., 2025) is an instance of computation in superposition. The CC model appears to compute 100 ReLU functions with just 50 neurons, achieving a better loss than expected from only representing 50 ReLU functions. We show that the model mixes inputs via its noisy residual stream, corresponding to an unintended mixing matrix in the labels. Splitting the training objective into the ReLU term and the mixing term, we find that performance gains scale with the magnitude of the mixing matrix and vanish when the matrix is removed. The learned neuron directions concentrate in the subspace associated with the top 50 eigenvalues of the mixing matrix, suggesting that the mixing term governs the solution. Finally, a semi-non-negative matrix factorization (SNMF) baseline derived solely from the mixing matrix reproduces the qualitative loss profile and improves on prior baselines, though it does not match the trained model. These results suggest CC is not a suitable toy model of computation in superposition.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 7 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Jun 2026.

Builds on

3 of 7 references.

References · 3

  1. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 928
  2. 2025Interpretability in Parameter Space: Minimizing Mechanistic Description Length with Attribution-based Parameter Decompositioncited by 25
  3. 2024On the Complexity of Neural Computation in Superpositioncited by 21

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.