Efficient Auto-Interpretability of AI Models in Biology
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → Interpreting biomedical and science models
Abstract (arXiv)
Sparse autoencoders (SAEs), and other interpretability methods could turn AI models in Biology and other fields into engines of scientific discovery by explaining the superhuman capabilities of those models. However, a latent is only useful if we know three things: whether it is coherent, whether it can be described, and whether that description has predictive power. These questions are routinely conflated. We assemble them into a single pipeline and report the practical innovations each stage required. First, cross-seed dictionary stability prioritises which latents are worth spending resources to investigate. Second, an intruder-detection task asks whether a latents activating examples share a recognizable pattern. Third, a separate pass proposes a candidate biological description which we convert into falsifiable predictions which can be tested in silico. Deployed on the Boltz-1 Pairformer trunk, stability prioritisation finds interpretable latents using about 4.4 times fewer latent evaluations each, and at 5.2 times lower measured cost, while recovering over half of them, and the external check shows the surfaced motifs are significantly enriched for their claimed annotations. The results also suggest a possible tension: the cross- seed stability might be selecting for some types of features, like structure-related ones, much more than others, such as function-related features.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Interpreting biomedical and science models, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 7 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Aug 2026.
Builds on
7 of 13 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Automated Neuron Labelling Enables Generative Steering and Interpretability in Protein Language Models8 Jul
- 2024InterPLM: Discovering Interpretable Features in Protein Language Models via Sparse Autoencoders13 Nov
Other references · 5
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Featurescited by 93
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Capture Concept Manifolds?cited by 31
- 2025Evaluating SAE interpretability without explanationscited by 5
- 2026Stable and Steerable Sparse Autoencoders with Weight Regularizationcited by 5
- 2026Probing and steering biology across Boltz-1s trunk-diffusion boundarycited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Can sparse autoencoders make sense of gene expression latent variable models?
- 2025Interpreting and Steering Protein Language Models through Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025ProtSAE: Disentangling and Interpreting Protein Language Models via Semantically-Guided Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025Mechanistic Interpretability of Antibody Language Models Using SAEs
- 2026From Residuals to Reasons: LLM-Guided Mechanism Inference from Tabular Data
- 2026ReproBAIT: Can coding agents build their own biological AI tools?
- 2026Complete or Sparse: A Tale of Two Identifiabilities
- 2025Equivariant Sparse Autoencoders: Mechanistic Interpretability of Neural Networks on Symmetric Data