cs.LGApr 3, 2026

MetaSAEs: Joint Training with a Decomposability Penalty Produces More Atomic Sparse Autoencoder Latents

Authors: Matthew Levinson

Organizations: Independent Researcher

Abstract

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are increasingly used for safety-relevant applications including alignment detection and model steering. These use cases require SAE latents to be as atomic as possible. Each latent should represent a single coherent concept drawn from a single underlying representational subspace. In practice, SAE latents blend representational subspaces together. A single feature can activate across semantically distinct contexts that share no true common representation, muddying an already complex picture of model computation. We introduce a joint training objective that directly penalizes this subspace blending. A small meta SAE is trained alongside the primary SAE to sparsely reconstruct the primary SAE's decoder columns; the primary SAE is penalized whenever its decoder directions are easy to reconstruct from the meta dictionary. This occurs whenever latent directions lie in a subspace spanned by other primary directions. This creates gradient pressure toward more mutually independent decoder directions that resist sparse meta-compression. On GPT-2 large (layer 20), the selected configuration reduces mean ∣φ∣|\varphi| by 7.5% relative to an identical solo SAE trained on the same data. Automated interpretability (fuzzing) scores improve by 7.6%, providing external validation of the atomicity gain independent of the training and co-occurrence metrics. Reconstruction overhead is modest. Results on Gemma 2 9B are directional. On not-fully-converged SAEs, the same parameterization yields the best results, a +8.6%+8.6\% ΔΔFuzz. Though directional, this is an encouraging sign that the method transfers to a larger model. Qualitative analysis confirms that features firing on polysemantic tokens are split into semantically distinct sub-features, each specializing in a distinct representational subspace.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables4 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

CardsList
  1. Sparse but Wrong: Incorrect L0 Leads to Incorrect Features in Sparse Autoencoders

    Aug 22, 2025David Chanin, Adrià Garriga-AlonsoActivation SparsityLLM Interpretability

  2. C2^{2}R: Cross-sample Consistency Regularization Mitigates Feature Splitting and Absorption in Sparse Autoencoders

    Jun 29, 2026Haoran Jin, Xiting Wang, Shijie Ren +2LLM InterpretabilityRepresentation Disentanglement