Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Bart Bussmann
dblp:235/1659
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 68% Representation and self-supervised learning · 32% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
1.7 | 2 | 2025 | Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders · ICML 2025 Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › mechanistic interpretability
sparse autoencoder |
1.7 | 2 | 2025 | Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders · ICML 2025 Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › feature transformation
feature decomposition |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › hierarchical representation › hierarchical representation learning
hierarchical feature representation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
mechanistic interpretability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of Analysis · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning › sparse coding
dictionary learning |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse Autoencoders · ICML 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
sparse autoencoder · 0.9nested dictionaries · 0.9meta-SAE · 0.9SAE stitching · 0.9BatchTopK SAE · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Sparse Autoencoders Do Not Find Canonical Units of AnalysisabstractA common goal of mechanistic interpretability is to decompose the activations of neural networks into features: interpretable properties of the input computed by the model. Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are a popular method for finding these features in LLMs, and it has been postulated that they can be used to find a canonical set of units: a unique and complete list of atomic features. We cast doubt on this belief using two novel techniques: SAE stitching to show they are incomplete, and meta-SAEs to show they are not atomic. SAE stitching involves inserting or swapping latents from a larger SAE into a smaller one. Latents from the larger SAE can be divided into two categories: novel latents, which improve performance when added to the smaller SAE, indicating they capture novel information, and reconstruction latents, which can replace corresponding latents in the smaller SAE that have similar behavior. The existence of novel features indicates incompleteness of smaller SAEs. Using meta-SAEs - SAEs trained on the decoder matrix of another SAE - we find that latents in SAEs often decompose into combinations of latents from a smaller SAE, showing that larger SAE latents are not atomic. The resulting decompositions are often interpretable; e.g. a latent representing "Einstein" decomposes into "scientist", "Germany", and "famous person". To train meta-SAEs we introduce BatchTopK SAEs, an improved variant of the popular TopK SAE method, that only enforces a fixed average sparsity. Even if SAEs do not find canonical units of analysis, they may still be useful tools. We suggest that future research should either pursue different approaches for identifying such units, or pragmatically choose the SAE size suited to their task. We provide an interactive dashboard to explore meta-SAEs: https://metasaes.streamlit.app/ Patrick Leask, Bart Bussmann, Michael T. Pearce, Joseph Isaac Bloom, Curt Tigges, Noura Al Moubayed, Lee Sharkey, Neel Nanda |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2025 | Learning Multi-Level Features with Matryoshka Sparse AutoencodersabstractSparse autoencoders (SAEs) have emerged as a powerful tool for interpreting neural networks by extracting the concepts represented in their activations. However, choosing the size of the SAE dictionary (i.e. number of learned concepts) creates a tension: as dictionary size increases to capture more relevant concepts, sparsity incentivizes features to be split or absorbed into more specific features, leaving high-level features missing or warped. We introduce Matryoshka SAEs, a novel variant that addresses these issues by simultaneously training multiple nested dictionaries of increasing size, forcing the smaller dictionaries to independently reconstruct the inputs without using the larger dictionaries. This organizes features hierarchically - the smaller dictionaries learn general concepts, while the larger dictionaries learn more specific concepts, without incentive to absorb the high-level features. We train Matryoshka SAEs on Gemma-2-2B and TinyStories and find superior performance on sparse probing and targeted concept erasure tasks, more disentangled concept representations, and reduced feature absorption. While there is a minor tradeoff with reconstruction performance, we believe Matryoshka SAEs are a superior alternative for practical tasks, as they enable training arbitrarily large SAEs while retaining interpretable features at different levels of abstraction. Bart Bussmann, Noa Nabeshima, Adam Karvonen, Neel Nanda |
ICML | 1 |
| 2021 | Neural Additive Vector Autoregression Models for Causal Discovery in Time Series
Bart Bussmann, Jannes Nys, Steven Latré |
DS | 1 |