Invariant Atoms: Sparse Coordinates of Local Semantic Geometry in Language Model Representations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models often preserve meaning despite substantial changes in wording, style, and syntax, while small semantic edits can systematically alter their hidden representations. This suggests that semantic variation may be organized along recurring local directions. We propose the Invariant Atom Hypothesis: local semantic motion admits preferred sparse coordinates along directions that remain stable under meaning-preserving transformations. We learn a shared semantic frame and sparse coordinates that reconstruct semantic displacements while suppressing nuisance variation, with anchor-dependent diagonal modulation adjusting atom strengths without sample-specific rotations. Empirically, the atoms exhibit strong semantic--nuisance separation, sparse reconstruction, reproducible directions, and causal effects on model predictions. The learned geometry generalizes to unseen semantic neighborhoods and nuisance families, while local reweighting improves semantic selectivity and preserves a consistent global-to-local structure. Atom signatures also remain stable under model modification. These findings support reusable invariant directions as a sparse coordinate system for local semantic geometry in language models.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2026.
Builds on
11 of 17 references.
References · 11
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,359
- 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,259
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 679
- 2024Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoderscited by 530
- 2020Null It Out: Guarding Protected Attributes by Iterative Nullspace Projectioncited by 442
- 2023LEACE: Perfect linear concept erasure in closed formcited by 254
- 2026Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnetcited by 175
- 2024The Geometry of Categorical and Hierarchical Concepts in Large Language Modelscited by 151
- 2022Linear Adversarial Concept Erasurecited by 98
- 2025Sparse Autoencoders, Again?cited by 3
- 2026Invariant Features in Language Models: Geometric Characterization and Model Attributioncited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.