Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Enhancing Automated Interpretability with Output-Centric Feature Descriptions

About

Automated interpretability pipelines generate natural language descriptions for the concepts represented by features in large language models (LLMs), such as plants or the first word in a sentence. These descriptions are derived using inputs that activate the feature, which may be a dimension or a direction in the model's representation space. However, identifying activating inputs is costly, and the mechanistic role of a feature in model behavior is determined both by how inputs cause a feature to activate and by how feature activation affects outputs. Using steering evaluations, we reveal that current pipelines provide descriptions that fail to capture the causal effect of the feature on outputs. To fix this, we propose efficient, output-centric methods for automatically generating feature descriptions. These methods use the tokens weighted higher after feature stimulation or the highest weight tokens after applying the vocabulary "unembedding" head directly to the feature. Our output-centric descriptions better capture the causal effect of a feature on model outputs than input-centric descriptions, but combining the two leads to the best performance on both input and output evaluations. Lastly, we show that output-centric descriptions can be used to find inputs that activate features previously thought to be "dead".

Yoav Gur-Arieh, Roy Mayan, Chen Agassy, Atticus Geiger, Mor Geva• 2025

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Interpreting Sparse Key-Value FeaturesQwen 1.7B 3
Input Success Rate (%)14.46
18
Output-based feature description evaluationLlama Instruct MLP features 3.1
Score45.8
9
Input-based feature description evaluationLlama Instruct MLP features 3.1
Score87.2
9
Interpreting Sparse Key-Value FeaturesGPT-2 Small
Input Success Rate31.47
9
Interpreting Sparse Key-Value FeaturesGemma 1B 3
Input Success Rate9.31
9
SAE Feature AttributionGPT-2 Small 128K SAE
Input Attribution (%)22.14
9
SAE Feature AttributionGemma-3-4B 16K SAE
Input Success Rate11.28
9
Sparse Key-Value Feature InterpretationQwen-3-0.6B
Input Success Rate (%)3.65
9
SAE Feature AttributionGemma-3-270M 16K SAE
Input Success Rate (%)7.66
9
SAE Feature AttributionGemma-3-1B 16K SAE
Input Attribution13.28
9
Showing 10 of 24 rows

Other info

Code

Follow for update