André Longon

Sunny Liu, Habon Issa, André Longon et al.

Comparing the internal representations of neural networks is a central goal in both neuroscience and machine learning. Standard alignment metrics operate on raw neural activations, implicitly assuming that similar representations produce similar activity patterns. However, neural systems frequently operate in superposition, encoding more features than they have neurons via linear compression. We derive closed-form expressions showing that superposition systematically deflates Representational Similarity Analysis, Centered Kernel Alignment, and linear regression, causing networks with identical feature content to appear dissimilar. The root cause is that these metrics are dependent on cross-similarity between two systems' respective superposition matrices, which under assumption of random projection usually differ significantly, not on the latent features themselves: alignment scores conflate what a system represents with how it represents it. Under partial feature overlap, this confound can invert the expected ordering, making systems sharing fewer features appear more aligned than systems sharing more. Crucially, the apparent misalignment need not reflect a loss of information; compressed sensing guarantees that the original features remain recoverable from the lower-dimensional activity, provided they are sparse. We therefore argue that comparing neural systems in superposition requires extracting and aligning the underlying features rather than comparing the raw neural mixtures.

André Longon, David Klindt, Meenakshi Khosla

The superposition hypothesis states that single neurons may participate in representing multiple features in order for the neural network to represent more features than it has neurons. In neuroscience and AI, representational alignment metrics measure the extent to which different deep neural networks (DNNs) or brains represent similar information. In this work, we explore a critical question: does superposition interact with alignment metrics in any undesirable way? We hypothesize that models which represent the same features in different superposition arrangements, i.e., their neurons have different linear combinations of the features, will interfere with predictive mapping metrics (semi-matching, soft-matching, linear regression), producing lower alignment than expected. We develop a theory for how permutation metrics are dependent on superposition arrangements. This is tested by training sparse autoencoders (SAEs) to disentangle superposition in toy models, where alignment scores are shown to typically increase when a model's base neurons are replaced with its sparse overcomplete latent codes. We find similar increases for DNN-DNN and DNN-brain linear regression alignment in the visual domain. Our results suggest that superposition disentanglement is necessary for mapping metrics to uncover the true representational alignment between neural networks.