Descriptive Collision in Sparse Autoencoder Auto-Interpretability: When One Explanation Describes Many Features

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.

Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used for mechanistic interpretability in large language models, yet their formulation assigns each latent feature a single decoder direction, implicitly assuming features to be one-dimensional. We show that this assumption mismatches with the multi-dimensional structure of model features, provably inducing feature splitting through two distinct mechanisms. Geometrically, reconstructing a feature of intrinsic dimension $d_i \ge 2$ to error $\varepsilon$ with single-direction decoders forces a number of atoms that is exponential in $d_i$. From an end-to-end optimization perspective, this splitting is not merely possible but actively preferred. We prove that there exists a continuous path from the true $d_i$-dimensional basis to a strictly lower risk of the $\ell_1$-regularized SAE objective, whose descent directions drive any trained dictionary into that exponential regime. A single coherent feature is therefore fragmented across many near-collinear latents, producing spurious multiplicity and obscuring the intrinsic geometry. Motivated by this, we introduce Subspace-Aware Sparse Autoencoders (SASA), which replace single-vector decoders with learned decoder subspaces, enforce block sparsity via Top-$s$ group gating, and adapt each group's effective rank with a nuclear-norm regularizer. We then show that once the block size satisfies $r \ge d_i$, a single group not only can represent the entire feature slice but is the global minimizer of the SASA objective. This consolidation yields a sample complexity polynomial in $d_i$ rather than exponential -- a decisive advantage given that every training activation costs an LLM forward pass. Empirically, on GPT-2 and Mistral-7B, SASA reduces feature splitting and absorption, improves monosemanticity and interpretability, and matches or exceeds standard SAEs while training on roughly half the token budget.

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are proposed to extract numerous features from large language model (LLM) representations, yet explaining these features still relies primarily on external observation. This reliance leads to superficial explanations inferred from observed model behavior and computational inefficiency from collecting such behavioral evidence at scale. We introduce SAEVerbalizer, a framework that injects SAE decoder directions into an LLM's representations and fine-tunes the LLM's downstream layers to generate natural-language explanations of the injected features. Once trained, the resulting verbalizer explains SAE features directly from decoder directions, addressing both limitations. Our experiments show that the learned verbalization capability generalizes to unseen features, transfers across separately trained SAE dictionaries, and, with a lightweight adapter, extends to SAE features from different LLMs. Intervention experiments show that injecting multiple directions yields an explanation combining their meanings, while reversing individual directions produces corresponding meaning shifts.