mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Individual Parameters in Weight-Sparse Transformers Appear Interpretable

arXiv 2607.02964 ↗First posted 3 Jul 2026cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Circuits and mechanistic analysis

Abstract (arXiv)

A central goal of mechanistic interpretability is to understand how neural networks work and what each individual component does. Dominant circuit-finding approaches focus on a specific behavior and reverse-engineer the role of components on the associated sub-distribution. However, past work has shown that components can have different functions that are active on different subsets of the input distribution. In this work we ask whether a single weight can be understood globally across the full training distribution by characterizing when it matters (the inputs on which ablating it changes the model's predictions). We introduce an automated LLM pipeline that writes a short, human-readable description of when a weight matters and verifies it on held-out text, crediting a weight only if its description generalizes. Across two sparse and two dense transformers, the fraction of weights that are interpretable (in this sense) is higher in sparse transformers than in dense ones, a gap that widens once unreliable descriptions are discarded. Our results show that a meaningful fraction of a sparse transformer model's weights can be interpreted: 12 to 31% of weights have a single short description that identifies what the weight is used for.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Circuits and mechanistic analysis, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 16 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jul 2026.

Builds on

16 of 23 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Weight-sparse transformers have interpretable circuits17 Nov
  2. 2025Identifying Sparsely Active Circuits Through Local Loss Landscape Decomposition31 Mar
  3. 2025Interpretability in Parameter Space: Minimizing Mechanistic Description Length with Attribution-based Parameter Decomposition24 Jan
  4. 2024Bilinear MLPs enable weight-based mechanistic interpretability10 Oct
  5. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 small1 Nov

Other references · 11

  1. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  2. 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
  3. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  4. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 971
  5. 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
  6. 2023Finding Neurons in a Haystack: Case Studies with Sparse Probingcited by 334
  7. 2023Tracr: Compiled Transformers as a Laboratory for Interpretabilitycited by 104
  8. 2024A Primer on the Inner Workings of Transformer-based Language Modelscited by 85
  9. 2024The Super Weight in Large Language Modelscited by 52
  10. 2025Stochastic Parameter Decompositioncited by 16
  11. 2026Large Language Models Generate Harmful Responses Using a Distinct Mechanism, Shared Across Harm Typescited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Sparse but not Simpler: A Multi-Level Interpretability Analysis of Vision Transformers
  2. 2026Sparse Transformer: a Controlled Testbed for Mechanistic Interpretability
  3. 2026Mechanistic Interpretability for Neural Networks: Circuits, Sparse Features and Symbolic Reasoning
  4. 2025Circuit Insights: Towards Interpretability Beyond Activations
  5. 2024Transcoders Find Interpretable LLM Feature Circuits
  6. 2025Automated Interpretability Metrics Do Not Distinguish Trained and Random Transformers
  7. 2024A Practical Review of Mechanistic Interpretability for Transformer-Based Language Models
  8. 2024Interpreting Attention Layer Outputs with Sparse Autoencoders