Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · September 28, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Interference is commonly treated as geometric overlap between learned features. We introduce effective interference, which combines feature geometry and code statistics to capture realized interactions, distinguishing constructive from destructive interference and frequent weak interactions from rare strong ones. Under local fixed-support assumptions, we characterize how architectural constraints shape interference through four mechanisms: feature orthogonalization, bias compensation, gain adaptation, and encoder-decoder separation. Experiments with sparse autoencoders show that constrained architectures selectively reduce overlap among co-active features, while bias, gain, and encoder freedom allow constructive cross-contributions to remain. Together, these results show that interference in learned representations depends not only on feature geometry, but also on how features are used and on the architecture that produces their codes.