Sparse but Wrong: Incorrect L0 Leads to Incorrect Features in Sparse Autoencoders
David Chanin, Adrià Garriga-Alonso
Abstract
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.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext c1995a5b-95ca-417d-8e9d-dc087f3beb0bCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on7
- Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language ModelsRobert Huben, Hoagy Cunningham, Logan Riggs Smith, Aidan Ewart et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,072 citations
- The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language ModelsKiho Park, Yo Joong Choe, Victor VeitchICML 2024 · 461 citations
- A is for Absorption: Studying Feature Splitting and Absorption in Sparse AutoencodersDavid Chanin, James Wilken-Smith, Tomás Dulka, Hardik Bhatnagar et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 168 citations
- Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencodersLeo Gao, Tom Dupré la Tour, Henk Tillman, Gabriel Goh et al.ICLR 2025 · 10 citations
- Not All Language Model Features Are One-Dimensionally LinearJoshua Engels, Eric J. Michaud, Isaac Liao, Wes Gurnee et al.ICLR 2025 · 3 citations
Related papers
- On the Limits of Sparse Autoencoders: A Theoretical Framework and Reweighted RemedyJingyi Cui, Qi Zhang, Yifei Wang, Yisen WangICLR 2026 · 16 citations
- Rethinking Evaluation of Sparse Autoencoders through the Representation of Polysemous WordsGouki Minegishi, Hiroki Furuta, Yusuke Iwasawa, Yutaka MatsuoICLR 2025
- Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different FeaturesGonçalo Paulo, Nora BelroseICLR 2026 · 96 citations
- Improving Sparse Decomposition of Language Model Activations with Gated Sparse AutoencodersSenthooran Rajamanoharan, Arthur Conmy, Lewis Smith, Tom Lieberum et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 49 citations
- Jacobian Sparse Autoencoders: Sparsify Computations, Not Just ActivationsLucy Farnik, Tim Lawson, Conor J. Houghton, Laurence AitchisonICML 2025
