mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Expander Sparse Autoencoders: Parameter-Efficient Dictionaries for Mechanistic Interpretability

arXiv 2607.01799 ↗First posted 2 Jul 2026cs.LG cs.AI cs.ITcited by 0

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) decompose internal activations of neural networks into sparse linear combinations of learned features by fitting an overcomplete dictionary W∈ℝm× n with m<n, and inferring a sparse code x∈ℝn from h≈Wx. This inference problem closely resembles the canonical setup of compressed sensing, but dense decoders requires O(mn) learned values, which becomes costly at large feature counts. We introduce Expander SAEs: TopK SAEs whose decoder and tied encoder are supported on a left-d-regular expander mask with dll m, learning only dn decoder values while keeping the sparse-coding problem (m,n,k) fixed. The same structure reduces storage and turns the matching-pursuit correlation step W^top r in OMP into an O(dn) gather-and-reduce operation. Our experiments show that across Pythia-70M/160M, Qwen2.5-3B, and Llama-3.2-1B residual-stream activations, varying d traces a consistent storage--fidelity frontier, and that at the most compressed modern-LM setting, Qwen2.5-3B with d=7 uses 293× fewer learned decoder values than the full dense decoder while retaining 84% of dense CE-loss recovered. Control experiments show that the improved storage--fidelity tradeoff is driven by sparse, diverse decoder support structure rather than by fewer learned decoder values, and that when sparse and dense decoders are compared at matched parameter count, part of the remaining gap comes from encoder amortisation. On the theoretical side, we show that expansion and column flatness are sufficient for identifiability of noiseless k-sparse codes, and we derive complementary sufficient conditions under which OMP recovers the support exactly.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Sparse autoencoder training and evaluation, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 9 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2026.

Builds on

9 of 32 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2022Toy Models of Superposition21 Sep

Other references · 8

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  3. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  4. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  5. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  6. 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
  7. 2026Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnetcited by 191
  8. 2024BatchTopK Sparse Autoencoderscited by 130

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Compute Optimal Inference and Provable Amortisation Gap in Sparse Autoencoders
  2. 2025Evaluating Sparse Autoencoders: From Shallow Design to Matching Pursuit
  3. 2024Features that Make a Difference: Leveraging Gradients for Improved Dictionary Learning
  4. 2025SplInterp: Improving our Understanding and Training of Sparse Autoencoders
  5. 2026Toward Identifiable Sparse Autoencoders
  6. 2026A Dominant Diffuse Phase in the Sparse Autoencoder Phase Diagram
  7. 2024Efficient Dictionary Learning with Switch Sparse Autoencoders
  8. 2025On the transferability of Sparse Autoencoders for interpreting compressed models