MoGround vision-language SAEs

Top-$K$ sparse autoencoders ($K{=}32$) trained on the last-token residual of a frozen VLM as it processes an image-caption pair, which is the position its answer is read from. Trained unsupervised on reconstruction alone, over 1,242,328 image-caption pairs drawn from CC3M (natural photos), PlotQA (charts), WikiArt (paintings) and OpenI (radiology).

The encoder and decoder are separate matrices rather than transposes of each other, both biases are learned, and the decoder rows are kept at unit norm. Width is 8x the model dimension. Training used batch size 4096, learning rate 3e-4 and no weight decay.

backbone layer d_model d_sae FVU alive frac. used in the paper file
Qwen2.5-VL-3B 13 2048 16384 0.011 0.64 qwen/layer13/sae.pt
Qwen2.5-VL-3B 20 2048 16384 0.016 0.75 qwen/layer20/sae.pt
Qwen2.5-VL-3B 28 2048 16384 0.009 0.61 yes qwen/layer28/sae.pt
Qwen2.5-VL-3B 31 2048 16384 0.005 0.4 qwen/layer31/sae.pt
LLaVA-NeXT-8B 12 4096 32768 0.081 0.43 llavanext/layer12/sae.pt
LLaVA-NeXT-8B 18 4096 32768 0.026 0.4 yes llavanext/layer18/sae.pt
LLaVA-NeXT-8B 25 4096 32768 0.01 0.45 llavanext/layer25/sae.pt

FVU is the share of variance the reconstruction fails to explain, so lower is better. Alive fraction is the share of features that fire at least once on an evaluation batch. Both are measured on held-out activations from the pretraining distribution.

Expect a much higher FVU off that distribution. On MoGround's multiple-choice prompts the layer-28 checkpoint reconstructs to FVU 0.78 about its own centre, and the centre itself has moved: the mean MoGround residual sits 107 away from the decoder bias, against a mean activation norm of 147. Measured against MoGround's own mean the apparent FVU is above 1. That is distribution shift between natural-caption pretraining and answer-time MCQ prompts, not a damaged checkpoint.

Use

from load_sae import load
sae = load("qwen/layer28/sae.pt")
out = sae(residual)          # dict with x_hat, z, indices, pre

MANIFEST.json carries a sha256 and the size of every checkpoint.

What these are for, and what they are not

They were trained to ask whether modality distraction is readable, and removable, in a sparse basis. It is readable: a probe on the SAE code separates distracted from robust items above a label-permutation null. It is not removable this way: ablating the most distraction-predictive features does no better than ablating the same number of random ones. Treat these as an interpretability tool, not as a mitigation.

Downloads last month

-

Downloads are not tracked for this model. How to track
Inference Providers NEW
This model isn't deployed by any Inference Provider. 🙋 Ask for provider support