Gradients for Interventions and Activations for Detection: Targeted Feature Learning in Language Models
On the map: Mechanistic interpretability → SAE features and their applications
Abstract (arXiv)
Model-internal features can be studied through both their ability to identify a specified concept and their causal effect when manipulated, e.g., through steering or weight editing. A prominent approach to feature learning is Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs), which learn broad feature dictionaries whose relation to particular concepts is typically identified post hoc. However, many interpretability questions are instead hypothesis-driven and concern a concept specified in advance. We study this setting as targeted feature learning, where a single feature is constructed for such a predefined concept. We present a controlled comparison across three model signals (activation values, activation gradients, and parameter gradients) and two estimators (contrastive mean and a learned one-dimensional encoder-decoder), yielding six targeted methods, with CAA and GRADIEND as existing instances and four new methods covering the remaining combinations. We compare these methods against pretrained SAEs across 15 tasks and three language models, evaluating both detection and causal intervention. Across models, the strongest detection performance is achieved by contrastive activation value methods, whereas the strongest intervention performance is achieved by gradient-based methods. Overall, our results show that targeted feature quality depends jointly on the model signal and estimator, with detection and intervention capturing complementary properties.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in SAE features and their applications, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability. Builds on 10 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.
Builds on
10 of 55 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Steering LLMs? Actually, Sparse Autoencoders can outperform simple baselines29 May
- 2024Improving Steering Vectors by Targeting Sparse Autoencoder Features4 Nov
Other references · 8
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2023Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparencycited by 1,336
- 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,319
- 2025A Unified Understanding and Evaluation of Steering Methodscited by 46
- 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Capture Concept Manifolds?cited by 31
- 2026The GRADIEND Python Package: An End-to-End System for Gradient-Based Feature Learningcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Are Sparse Autoencoders Useful? A Case Study in Sparse Probing
- 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoders
- 2025Scaling sparse feature circuit finding for in-context learning
- 2025Measuring Sparse Autoencoder Feature Sensitivity
- 2025Beyond Input Activations: Identifying Influential Latents by Gradient Sparse Autoencoders
- 2026Sparse Autoencoders for Mechanistic Interpretability in NLP: A Critical Survey of Recoverability, Interpretability, and Utility
- 2025Investigating task-specific prompts and sparse autoencoders for activation monitoring
- 2025A Survey on Sparse Autoencoders: Interpreting the Internal Mechanisms of Large Language Models