Interference Beyond Geometry in Concept Extraction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Interference is commonly treated as geometric overlap between learned features. We introduce effective interference, which combines feature geometry and code statistics to capture realized interactions, distinguishing constructive from destructive interference and frequent weak interactions from rare strong ones. Under local fixed-support assumptions, we characterize how architectural constraints shape interference through four mechanisms: feature orthogonalization, bias compensation, gain adaptation, and encoder-decoder separation. Experiments with sparse autoencoders show that constrained architectures selectively reduce overlap among co-active features, while bias, gain, and encoder freedom allow constructive cross-contributions to remain. Together, these results show that interference in learned representations depends not only on feature geometry, but also on how features are used and on the architecture that produces their codes.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 64 of its 87 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.
Builds on
64 of 87 references.
References · 64
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
- 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
- 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,319
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
- 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 553
- 2024Mechanistic Interpretability for AI Safety -- A Reviewcited by 422
- 2023Finding Neurons in a Haystack: Case Studies with Sparse Probingcited by 334
38 more
- 2023Language Models Represent Space and Timecited by 316
- 2024Jumping Ahead: Improving Reconstruction Fidelity with JumpReLU Sparse Autoencoderscited by 300
- 2013k-Sparse Autoencoderscited by 215
- 2024Not All Language Model Features Are One-Dimensionally Linearcited by 212
- 2024Improving Dictionary Learning with Gated Sparse Autoencoderscited by 179
- 2025Open Problems in Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 179
- 2022CRAFT: Concept Recursive Activation FacTorization for Explainabilitycited by 178
- 2016Linear Algebraic Structure of Word Senses, with Applications to Polysemycited by 165
- 2024A is for Absorption: Studying Feature Splitting and Absorption in Sparse Autoencoderscited by 160
- 2025Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoderscited by 143
- 2024BatchTopK Sparse Autoencoderscited by 130
- 2025SAEBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Sparse Autoencoders in Language Model Interpretabilitycited by 124
- 2020Invertible Concept-based Explanations for CNN Models with Non-negative Concept Activation Vectorscited by 120
- 2023A Holistic Approach to Unifying Automatic Concept Extraction and Concept Importance Estimationcited by 109
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different Featurescited by 93
- 2024On the Origins of Linear Representations in Large Language Modelscited by 79
- 2022Polysemanticity and Capacity in Neural Networkscited by 77
- 2025Archetypal SAE: Adaptive and Stable Dictionary Learning for Concept Extraction in Large Vision Modelscited by 73
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders Learn Monosemantic Features in Vision-Language Modelscited by 71
- 2025Language Models Use Trigonometry to Do Additioncited by 70
- 2024InterPLM: Discovering Interpretable Features in Protein Language Models via Sparse Autoencoderscited by 66
- 2025Projecting Assumptions: The Duality Between Sparse Autoencoders and Concept Geometrycited by 61
- 2024The Geometry of Concepts: Sparse Autoencoder Feature Structurecited by 52
- 2025From Flat to Hierarchical: Extracting Sparse Representations with Matching Pursuitcited by 49
- 2014Sparse Modeling for Image and Vision Processingcited by 48
- 2024Mathematical Models of Computation in Superpositioncited by 35
- 2025Into the Rabbit Hull: From Task-Relevant Concepts in DINO to Minkowski Geometrycited by 34
- 2023Amortized Variational Inference: When and Why?cited by 29
- 2025Priors in Time: Missing Inductive Biases for Language Model Interpretabilitycited by 25
- 2024On the Complexity of Neural Computation in Superpositioncited by 21
- 2023What Causes Polysemanticity? An Alternative Origin Story of Mixed Selectivity from Incidental Causescited by 19
- 2024Compute Optimal Inference and Provable Amortisation Gap in Sparse Autoencoderscited by 18
- 2025Temporal Sparse Autoencoders: Leveraging the Sequential Nature of Language for Interpretabilitycited by 18
- 2021Stable and Interpretable Unrolled Dictionary Learningcited by 15
- 2025On the Limits of Sparse Autoencoders: A Theoretical Framework and Reweighted Remedycited by 14
- 2025Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Superpositioncited by 13
- 2026From Directions to Regions: Decomposing Activations in Language Models via Local Geometrycited by 12
- 2026How Many Features Can a Language Model Store Under the Linear Representation Hypothesis?cited by 12
50 most cited of 64 All 64 (JSON)
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025A Geometric Unification of Concept Learning with Concept Cones
- 2026Adversarial Concept Search: Predicting Compositional Errors From Feature Geometry
- 2026Encoded but Not Actionable: Auditing the Decode-Generate-Steer Gap in Frozen LLMs for Geometric Constraints
- 2026Sparse Prototype Code Underlies Classification and Prediction Across Modalities
- 2026Interactions Between Crosscoder Features: A Compact Proofs Perspective
- 2026PolySAE: Modeling Feature Interactions in Sparse Autoencoders via Polynomial Decoding
- 2026Structural Instability of Feature Composition
- 2026Hidden not Deleted: How Networks Suppress Entangled Features