mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Same Concept, Different Directions: Cross-Modal Feature Heterogeneity in Sparse Autoencoders

arXiv 2606.29888 ↗First posted 29 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.CVcited by 0

On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → MLLM training and visual instruction tuning

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Vision-language models map images and text into a joint embedding space. However, these embeddings often entangle multiple semantic features, which limits their interpretability and controllability. While sparse autoencoders have emerged as a useful tool for decomposing these embeddings into monosemantic features, their application to joint embedding spaces has largely relied on an implicit, untested assumption that semantically corresponding features share the same directions across modalities. In this paper, we challenge this assumption by identifying discrepancies in feature directions for the same concept across image and text modalities, a phenomenon we term cross-modal feature heterogeneity. We demonstrate that this heterogeneity is a key driver of the modality split, where a shared concept activates different latents depending on the modality. This finding further reveals why aligning latent activations alone is insufficient to resolve the underlying feature mismatch. Motivated by this observation, we propose an approach that trains modality-specific sparse autoencoders to preserve each modality's feature geometry, and then aligns corresponding features post hoc. Our method improves reconstruction fidelity and enhances performance in cross-modal retrieval and concept steering.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in MLLM training and visual instruction tuning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 44 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jun 2026.

Builds on

44 of 60 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Cross-Modal Redundancy and the Geometry of Vision-Language Embeddings5 Feb
  2. 2025Cross the Gap: Exposing the Intra-modal Misalignment in CLIP via Modality Inversion6 Feb
  3. 2024Large Multi-modal Models Can Interpret Features in Large Multi-modal Models22 Nov

Other references · 41

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,608
  3. 2023Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 7,869
  4. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  5. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,353
  6. 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,302
  7. 2022CoCa: Contrastive Captioners are Image-Text Foundation Modelscited by 1,274
  8. 2025SigLIP 2: Multilingual Vision-Language Encoders with Improved Semantic Understanding, Localization, and Dense Featurescited by 1,188
  9. 2022Reproducible scaling laws for contrastive language-image learningcited by 1,173
  10. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
  11. 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,085
  12. 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 1,032
29 more
  1. 2021StyleCLIP: Text-Driven Manipulation of StyleGAN Imagerycited by 991
  2. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 971
  3. 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
  4. 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
  5. 2022Mind the Gap: Understanding the Modality Gap in Multi-modal Contrastive Representation Learningcited by 561
  6. 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
  7. 2024Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Modelscited by 435
  8. 2013k-Sparse Autoencoderscited by 215
  9. 2026Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnetcited by 191
  10. 2016Linear Algebraic Structure of Word Senses, with Applications to Polysemycited by 165
  11. 2022CLIP-Dissect: Automatic Description of Neuron Representations in Deep Vision Networkscited by 147
  12. 2023A Toy Model of Universality: Reverse Engineering How Networks Learn Group Operationscited by 144
  13. 2024BatchTopK Sparse Autoencoderscited by 130
  14. 2024Discover-then-Name: Task-Agnostic Concept Bottlenecks via Automated Concept Discoverycited by 91
  15. 2025Sparse Autoencoders Learn Monosemantic Features in Vision-Language Modelscited by 71
  16. 2025Meta CLIP 2: A Worldwide Scaling Recipecited by 64
  17. 2025Interpreting CLIP with Hierarchical Sparse Autoencoderscited by 60
  18. 2024Two Effects, One Trigger: On the Modality Gap, Object Bias, and Information Imbalance in Contrastive Vision-Language Modelscited by 57
  19. 2023Understanding and Constructing Latent Modality Structures in Multi-modal Representation Learningcited by 53
  20. 2025From Flat to Hierarchical: Extracting Sparse Representations with Matching Pursuitcited by 49
  21. 2025Interpreting the linear structure of vision-language model embedding spacescited by 32
  22. 2023Intra-Modal Proxy Learning for Zero-Shot Visual Categorization with CLIPcited by 27
  23. 2024Connect, Collapse, Corrupt: Learning Cross-Modal Tasks with Uni-Modal Datacited by 27
  24. 2023Understanding Transferable Representation Learning and Zero-shot Transfer in CLIPcited by 26
  25. 2025Post-pre-training for Modality Alignment in Vision-Language Foundation Modelscited by 18
  26. 2025On the Limits of Sparse Autoencoders: A Theoretical Framework and Reweighted Remedycited by 14
  27. 2025Measuring and Guiding Monosemanticitycited by 10
  28. 2026Closing the Modality Gap Aligns Group-Wise Semanticscited by 5
  29. 2026Decomposing multimodal embedding spaces with group-sparse autoencoderscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026When Structured Sparse Autoencoders Learn Consistent Concepts Across Modalities
  2. 2025Beyond Cross-Modal Alignment: Measuring and Leveraging Modality Gap in Vision-Language Models
  3. 2025SPARC: Concept-Aligned Sparse Autoencoders for Cross-Model and Cross-Modal Interpretability
  4. 2026The Geometry of Compromise: Unlocking Generative Capabilities via Controllable Modality Alignment
  5. 2026Learning to Detect Cross-Modal Negation: An Analysis of Latent Representations and an Attention-Based Solution
  6. 2026One Geometry, Different Outcomes: Readout-Dependent Effects of the Modality Gap in Vision-Language Models
  7. 2025Explaining How Visual, Textual and Multimodal Encoders Share Concepts
  8. 2025SAE-V: Interpreting Multimodal Models for Enhanced Alignment