Position: Mechanistic Interpretability Should Prioritize Feature Consistency in SAEs
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:5IEZ3NVZrecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) are a prominent tool in mechanistic interpretability (MI) for decomposing neural network activations into interpretable features. However, the aspiration to identify a canonical set of features is challenged by the observed inconsistency of learned SAE features across different training runs, undermining the reliability and efficiency of MI research. This position paper argues that mechanistic interpretability should prioritize feature consistency in SAEs -- the reliable convergence to equivalent feature sets across independent runs. We propose using the Pairwise Dictionary Mean Correlation Coefficient (PW-MCC) as a practical metric to operationalize consistency and demonstrate that high levels are achievable (0.80 for TopK SAEs on LLM activations) with appropriate architectural choices. Our contributions include detailing the benefits of prioritizing consistency; providing theoretical grounding and synthetic validation using a model organism, which verifies PW-MCC as a reliable proxy for ground-truth recovery; and extending these findings to real-world LLM data, where high feature consistency strongly correlates with the semantic similarity of learned feature explanations. We call for a community-wide shift towards systematically measuring feature consistency to foster robust cumulative progress in MI.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Graph-Regularized Sparse Autoencoders for LLM Safety Steering
GSAE improves selective refusal on safety benchmarks by smoothing SAE directions over a co-activation graph and applying them via a two-gate controller, outperforming standard SAEs and baselines on Llama-3 and other models.
-
Make Mechanistic Interpretability Auditable: A Call to Develop Guidelines via Continuous Collaborative Reviewing
The paper proposes a community-driven platform for continuous reviewing and guideline development to audit mechanistic interpretability research.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.