Falsifying Sparse Autoencoder Reasoning Features in Language Models

We study how reliably sparse autoencoders (SAEs) support claims about reasoning-related internal features in large language models. We first give a stylized analysis showing that sparsity-regularized decoding can preferentially retain stable low-dimensional correlates while suppressing high-dimensional within-behavior variation, motivating the possibility that contrastively selected "reasoning" features may concentrate on cue-like structure when such cues are coupled with reasoning traces. Building on this perspective, we propose a falsification-based evaluation framework that combines causal token injection with LLM-guided counterexample construction. Across 22 configurations spanning multiple model families, layers, and reasoning datasets, we find that many contrastively selected candidates are highly sensitive to token-level interventions, with 45%–90% activating after injecting only a few associated tokens into non-reasoning text. For the remaining context-dependent candidates, LLM-guided falsification produces targeted non-reasoning inputs that trigger activation and meaning-preserving paraphrases of top-activating reasoning traces that suppress it. A small steering study yields minimal changes on the evaluated benchmarks. Overall, our results suggest that, in the settings we study, sparse decompositions can favor low-dimensional correlates that co-occur with reasoning, underscoring the need for falsification when attributing high-level behaviors to individual SAE features.