A Dominant Diffuse Phase in the Sparse Autoencoder Phase Diagram

Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) have found success parsing neural representations into interpretable concepts, providing a basis for understanding and control. However, what exactly SAEs extract, and, correspondingly, the scientific conclusions we can draw from them, are not obvious. Empirically, the proof is in the pudding: SAEs learn interpretable features. Theoretically, we lack a clear account of what properties a 'concept' must satisfy for an SAE to extract it. There has been extensive identifiability work studying the conditions under which sparse coding recovers ground-truth features; however, these approaches tends to focus on simple data-generating models (e.g. sparse independent features) which poorly approximate the internet-swallowing language-model representations on which SAEs are trained. Here, avoiding data-generating models, we ask simply what properties any dictionary learning optimum must satisfy. Concretely, we extend local optimality analyses (Gribonval & Schnass, 2010) to the nonnegative joint-optimisation problem that vanilla SAEs approximate, and derive constraints relating optimal SAE features to their distributions. We use these constraints to explain a range of observed SAE behaviours - hierarchical splitting & absorption, the structure of residuals, and dense antipodal features - each reflecting how L1+nonnegativity interact with data to structure optimal dictionaries. Finally, we construct a novel large-dictionary convex problem and explore the wide atom-per-datapoint limit. In sum, we hope to tease model assumptions from unexpected observations, letting us learn more from SAEs' successes and provide principles for designing their successors.

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) decompose internal activations of neural networks into sparse linear combinations of learned features by fitting an overcomplete dictionary $\mathbf{W}\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ with $m<n$, and inferring a sparse code $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^n$ from $\mathbf{h}\approx\mathbf{W}\mathbf{x}$. This inference problem closely resembles the canonical setup of compressed sensing, but dense decoders requires $O(mn)$ learned values, which becomes costly at large feature counts. We introduce Expander SAEs: TopK SAEs whose decoder and tied encoder are supported on a left-$d$-regular expander mask with $d\ll m$, learning only $dn$ decoder values while keeping the sparse-coding problem $(m,n,k)$ fixed. The same structure reduces storage and turns the matching-pursuit correlation step $\mathbf{W}^\top \mathbf{r}$ in OMP into an $O(dn)$ gather-and-reduce operation. Our experiments show that across Pythia-70M/160M, Qwen2.5-3B, and Llama-3.2-1B residual-stream activations, varying $d$ traces a consistent storage--fidelity frontier, and that at the most compressed modern-LM setting, Qwen2.5-3B with $d=7$ uses $293\times$ fewer learned decoder values than the full dense decoder while retaining $84$% of dense CE-loss recovered. Control experiments show that the improved storage--fidelity tradeoff is driven by sparse, diverse decoder support structure rather than by fewer learned decoder values, and that when sparse and dense decoders are compared at matched parameter count, part of the remaining gap comes from encoder amortisation. On the theoretical side, we show that expansion and column flatness are sufficient for identifiability of noiseless $k$-sparse codes, and we derive complementary sufficient conditions under which OMP recovers the support exactly.

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used to interpret neural network representations, but their utility depends on whether the learned features are reproducible across training runs. We study this question through \emph{feature stability}: for each SAE feature, we estimate the probability that a similar feature reappears in an independently trained SAE. This yields a scalable per-feature signal that separates stable from unstable features. In a large-scale study across seeds, models, layers, dictionary sizes, and SAE variants, we find a pronounced functional asymmetry: stable features carry most of the reconstruction- and prediction-relevant signal, while unstable features have weak marginal impact and are dominated by low-frequency surface-form triggers in both activation statistics and automatic explanations. Geometrically, unstable features are individually non-reproducible but concentrate in reproducible lower-rank subspaces, suggesting that seed dependence often reflects basis ambiguity within a shared region of activation space rather than pure noise. A controlled synthetic model makes this mechanism explicit, showing that low-rank ground-truth features can be recovered at the subspace level while remaining non-identifiable as individual SAE latents across seeds. Finally, by pooling unique cross-seed features, we construct more stable SAEs while preserving explained variance in this setting. Together, these results show that unstable features are not merely failed or noisy latents: they have weak individual functional impact, but reflect reproducible low-dimensional structure that standard SAEs resolve differently across seeds.