Causal dictionary learning reveals and validates transcription-factor binding features in genomic language models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Genomic language models achieve strong performance across regulatory-genomics tasks, yet what these models internally represent remains opaque, and the field lacks a principled procedure for verifying that an apparent ``concept'' inside a model is real rather than an artifact of sequence composition. We introduce a framework that combines sparse dictionary learning with causal intervention to extract, validate, and causally test interpretable features in genomic foundation models. Training top-k sparse autoencoders on the hidden activations of two architecturally distinct models, Nucleotide Transformer (6-mer tokenization) and DNABERT-2 (byte-pair encoding), we recover thousands of monosemantic features that map to transcription-factor (TF) sequence motifs. We show that the naive validation of such features against position weight matrices is severely confounded by GC composition and repetitive elements, producing hundreds of spurious ``TF features'', and we develop a composition-matched, binding-resolved protocol that removes these confounds. Critically, we move beyond correlation: by ablating individual dictionary directions during the model's forward pass and measuring the induced shift in the model's own predictive distribution, we establish that specific features are causally used to represent cell-type-specific TF binding, not merely motif presence. Across three transcription factors (CTCF, GATA1, REST) and both architectures, causally validated binding features emerge reproducibly (7--14 of 15 tested features per condition), while two classes of negative control, scrambled binding labels and randomly selected features, yield no detectable signal. The framework is purely computational, uses only public data, and provides a reusable standard for interpretability claims in genomic deep learning.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jul 2026.
Builds on
11 of 31 references.
References · 11
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2023Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spacescited by 4,616
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,454
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,359
- 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 928
- 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 530
- 2023HyenaDNA: Long-Range Genomic Sequence Modeling at Single Nucleotide Resolutioncited by 187
- 2026Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnetcited by 175
- 2024Caduceus: Bi-Directional Equivariant Long-Range DNA Sequence Modelingcited by 108
- 2023Is This the Subspace You Are Looking for? An Interpretability Illusion for Subspace Activation Patchingcited by 75
Built on by
Not cited yet.