<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Sparse Autoencoders | Sara Candussio</title><link>https://saracandussio.github.io/tags/sparse-autoencoders/</link><atom:link href="https://saracandussio.github.io/tags/sparse-autoencoders/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><description>Sparse Autoencoders</description><generator>Hugo Blox Builder (https://hugoblox.com)</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>"Don't Say It!": Constraints, Compliance, and Communication when Language Models Play Taboo</title><link>https://saracandussio.github.io/publication/lmtaboo/</link><pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://saracandussio.github.io/publication/lmtaboo/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="key-findings">Key findings&lt;/h2>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Explicit constraints work.&lt;/strong> Without being told the forbidden words, models break the rules in about two thirds of cases. Prompting raises compliance above 90% for Gemma and for gpt-oss with reasoning, and constrained decoding reaches up to 98.5%.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Compliance breakdown by model and constraint strategy." srcset="
/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance_hu4624855150758071424.webp 400w,
/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance_hu2232433585483480342.webp 760w,
/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance_hu6679561330521547985.webp 1200w"
src="https://saracandussio.github.io/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance_hu4624855150758071424.webp"
width="760"
height="321"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Reasoning helps follow the rules.&lt;/strong> gpt-oss-20b goes from 72% to 97% compliance under prompting when chain-of-thought is enabled.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>How you constrain shapes what the model says.&lt;/strong> Constrained decoding pushes models toward more precise paraphrases, and human guessers do best on these descriptions (38% vs. 23% for prompting). SAE steering keeps descriptions informative but often violates the rules and switches language.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Rule compliance versus how often a model judge guesses the target within 10 tries (pass@10)." srcset="
/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance-vs-guessability_hu11896575050429390626.webp 400w,
/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance-vs-guessability_hu10380791304109304415.webp 760w,
/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance-vs-guessability_hu3145358206015888656.webp 1200w"
src="https://saracandussio.github.io/publication/lmtaboo/fig-compliance-vs-guessability_hu11896575050429390626.webp"
width="760"
height="272"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Models are weak guessers.&lt;/strong> Even the better judge needs 5 to 10 guesses to approach human first-try accuracy.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul></description></item></channel></rss>