Are Single-Token Sparse Autoencoder Features Causally Necessary? Layer-Depth and SAE-Family Effects
TL;DR
This work analyzesparse autoencoder features across six models and three SAE families and zero-ablate at full layer depth, finding cross-family claims are sensitive to training methodology, not just activation function or scale.
Abstract
Sparse autoencoder (SAE) features are used to interpret and steer large language models, yet nobody has tested whether a feature's causal role is stable across SAE families. Single-token features fire on one vocabulary item, so ground truth permits direct comparison. We analyze 3.9M features across six models and three SAE families and zero-ablate at full layer depth: they sit 4.7x tighter in decoder space and concentrate in early layers. Deleting one lowers the model's logit for that token in 178 of 208 layer conditions, significant after multiple-comparison correction. And depth decides how the damage lands: early-layer deletions disrupt the layers that follow, late-layer deletions change the output directly. Cross-family causal differences exceed within-family scale effects: on the same base model, GemmaScope and BatchTopK features are causally anchored, LlamaScope features locally redundant. Under LlamaScope the token returns to within 2x its pre-ablation rank 96-98% of the time. Changing only the activation function reverses the sign of that difference, so the training recipe is the remaining candidate: cross-family claims are sensitive to training methodology, not just activation function or scale.
