WriteSAE: Sparse Autoencoders for Recurrent State

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) decompose language model activations into sparse features, yet these models traditionally encode each token independently, failing to expose information that persists across a sequence. We first show that temporal persistence can naturally emerge in standard SAE features: after a feature activates, the hidden state remains aligned with its direction, and past activations help reconstruct later hidden states. How long this lasts varies widely across features. We therefore introduce Persistent Sparse Autoencoders (Persistent SAEs), an extension of standard SAEs that learns a persistence coefficient for each feature, allowing the model to learn feature-specific timescales from reconstruction alone. Our experiments show that Persistent SAEs retain competitive reconstruction quality while learning a spectrum of timescales: short-timescale (fast) features stay locally interpretable, whereas long-timescale (slow) features accumulate information that identifies the current context. Moreover, we show in a prompt-injection monitoring case study that slow features preserve injection-related signals and remain causally effective over long contexts. These results suggest that Persistent SAEs offer new opportunities for interpreting and monitoring language models via persistent sparse features.

Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) have been seen as a promising avenue for exploring the internals of Large Language Models (LLMs) and for steering model output generation. When AxBench - a model steering benchmark - was introduced in Wu et al. (2025), SAEs did not seem to live up to their original hype due to poor steering performance relative to a set of simple baselines. This work serves as a partial rebuttal for Sparse Autoencoders and suggests that the results of Wu et al. (2025) did not do them full justice. We find that Sparse Autoencoders can, in fact, perform close to on par with the reference LoRA performance on the AxBench benchmark, when features are selected and labelled with our supervised pipeline. We also find that our pipeline selects features that are surprisingly causal of their identified labels when using only its interpretability-based components. Lastly, we present evidence that high sparsity (low l0) may not be crucial for successful steering based on interpretability, which is in contrast to the earlier findings in Wang et al. (2025).

Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) extract features from LLM internal activations, meant to correspond to interpretable concepts. A core SAE training hyperparameter is L0: how many SAE features should fire per token on average. Existing work compares SAE algorithms using sparsity-reconstruction tradeoff plots, implying L0 is a free parameter with no inherently correct value aside from its effect on reconstruction. In this work we study the effect of L0 on SAEs, and show that if L0 is not set correctly, the SAE fails to disentangle the underlying features of the LLM. If L0 is too low, the SAE will mix correlated features to improve reconstruction. If L0 is too high, the SAE finds degenerate solutions that also mix features. Further, we present a proxy metric that can help guide the search for the correct L0 for an SAE on a given training distribution. We show that our method finds the correct L0 in toy models and coincides with peak sparse probing performance in LLM SAEs. We find that most commonly used SAEs have an L0 that is too low. Our work shows that practitioners must set L0 correctly to train SAEs with monosemantic features.