Dense SAE Latents Are Features, Not Bugs
Xiaoqing Sun, Alessandro Stolfo, Joshua Engels, Ben Wu, Senthooran Rajamanoharan, Mrinmaya Sachan, Max Tegmark
Abstract
Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are designed to extract interpretable features from language models by enforcing a sparsity constraint. Ideally, training an SAE would yield latents that are both sparse and semantically meaningful. However, many SAE latents activate frequently (i.e., are dense), raising concerns that they may be undesirable artifacts of the training procedure. In this work, we systematically investigate the geometry, function, and origin of dense latents and show that they are not only persistent but often reflect meaningful model representations. We first demonstrate that dense latents tend to form antipodal pairs that reconstruct specific directions in the residual stream, and that ablating their subspace suppresses the emergence of new dense features in retrained SAEs -- suggesting that high density features are an intrinsic property of the residual space. We then introduce a taxonomy of dense latents, identifying classes tied to position tracking, context binding, entropy regulation, letter-specific output signals, part-of-speech, and principal component reconstruction. Finally, we analyze how these features evolve across layers, revealing a shift from structural features in early layers, to semantic features in mid layers, and finally to output-oriented signals in the last layers of the model. Our findings indicate that dense latents serve functional roles in language model computation and should not be dismissed as training noise.
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 e7a4f6e9-13be-4e56-9979-655b06330eddCited by top-tier papers2
- Semantic Regexes: Auto-Interpreting LLM Features with a Structured LanguageAngie W. Boggust, Donghao Ren, Yannick Assogba, Dominik Moritz et al.ICLR 2026 · 3 citations
- Transformers learn factored representationsAdam Shai, Loren Amdahl-Culleton, Casper Christensen, Henry R Bigelow et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
Builds on14
- 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
- How do Language Models Bind Entities in Context?Jiahai Feng, Jacob SteinhardtICLR 2024 · 81 citations
- Confidence Regulation Neurons in Language ModelsAlessandro Stolfo, Ben Wu, Wes Gurnee, Yonatan Belinkov et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 68 citations
Related papers
- Residual Stream Analysis with Multi-Layer SAEsTim Lawson, Lucy Farnik, Conor J. Houghton, Laurence AitchisonICLR 2025
- Sparse Autoencoders Trained on the Same Data Learn Different FeaturesGonçalo Paulo, Nora BelroseICLR 2026 · 96 citations
- Temporal Sparse Autoencoders: Leveraging the Sequential Nature of Language for InterpretabilityUsha Bhalla, Alex Oesterling, Claudio Mayrink Verdun, Himabindu Lakkaraju et al.ICLR 2026 · 18 citations
- Dimensional Collapse in Transformer Attention Outputs: A Challenge for Sparse Dictionary LearningJunxuan Wang, Xuyang Ge, Wentao Shu, Zhengfu He et al.ICML 2026 · 5 citations
- From Flat to Hierarchical: Extracting Sparse Representations with Matching PursuitValérie Costa, Thomas Fel, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Bahareh Tolooshams et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 54 citations
