Representation of Constituents in Neural Language Models: Coordination Phrase as a Case Study (D19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies have focused on the ability of neural models to compute and employ phrase-level features attached to a set of words, such as subject number or whquestion words. |
| Approach: | They examine whether models can represent constituent-level features, using coordinated noun phrases as a case study. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can combine gender and gender features to drive downstream expectations, while having less success with gender agreement. |
Similar Papers
Two Local Models for Neural Constituent Parsing (C18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Non-local features have been shown crucial for statistical parsing, but local models can give highly competitive accuracies thanks to the power of dense neural input representations. |
| Approach: | They propose to use local neural models for constituent parsing to capture dependencies between sub output structures and to exploit non-local features. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model achieves labeled bracketing F1 scores of 92.4% on PTB and 87.3% on CTB 5.1. |
Do Neural Language Models Inferentially Compose Concepts the Way Humans Can? (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a new study shows that language models and humans may rely on different approaches to represent and compose lexical items across sentence structure. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a dataset to test the performance of neural language models and humans on inferentially driven conceptual compositions. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model elicits probability estimates for a noun in a minimally composed phrase . RoBERTa, BERT-large, and GPT-2 exhibited the closest resemblance to human responses . |
Causal Analysis of Syntactic Agreement Mechanisms in Neural Language Models (2021.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Targeted syntactic evaluations have demonstrated the ability of language models to perform subject-verb agreement given difficult contexts. |
| Approach: | They apply causal mediation analysis to pre-trained neural language models to investigate their models' preferences for grammatical inflections and whether neurons process subject-verb agreement similarly across sentences with different syntactic structures. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can predict correct token from grammatically minimally different continuations with high accuracy even in difficult contexts. |
What do character-level models learn about morphology? The case of dependency parsing (D18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | morphologically rich languages require character-level input models to learn morphology, but some models are poor at disambiguating some words . authors of this study show that character- level models learn a lot from input input . explicit modeling of morphologies is expensive and expensive, authors say . |
| Approach: | They compare character-level models to an oracle with explicit morphological analysis . they show that explicitly modeling morphology improves their best model . |
| Outcome: | The results show that character-level models learn morphology better than word models . the authors compare character-based models to oracles on 12 languages with morphological typologies . |
Overestimation of Syntactic Representation in Neural Language Models (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Several testing methodologies have been developed to probe models’ syntactic representations. |
| Approach: | They propose a method to determine syntactic structure by training a model on strings generated according to a template and testing its ability to distinguish between similar ones with different syntax. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method reproduces positive results with two non-syntactic baseline language models: an n-gram model and an LSTM model trained on scrambled inputs. |
Parsing All: Syntax and Semantics, Dependencies and Spans (2020.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Syntactic and semantic structures are key linguistic contextual clues, but few studies have explored how they can be used to improve syntactical parsing. |
| Approach: | They propose a syntactic and semantic parsing model which integrates syntaktic information in the encoder of neural network and benefits from two representation formalisms in a uniform way. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model achieves state-of-the-art or competitive results on both span and dependency representations and on Penn Treebank. |
Do Neural Language Models Show Preferences for Syntactic Formalisms? (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent work on interpretability of deep neural language models concludes that many properties of natural language syntax are encoded in their representational spaces. |
| Approach: | They propose to examine whether syntactic structure adheres to a surface-syntactical or deep syntaktic style of analysis. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model prefers Universal Dependencies (UD) over Surface-Syntactic Universal Dependency (SUD) with interesting variations across languages and layers. |
Are Transformers a Modern Version of ELIZA? Observations on French Object Verb Agreement (2021.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies have shown that unsupervised sentence representations of neural networks encode syntactic information by observing that neural language models are able to predict the agreement between a verb and its subject. |
| Approach: | They propose to take an alternative look at these results by studying whether neural networks are able to build an abstract sentence representation rather than capture surface statistical regularities. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can achieve high accuracy on the long-range French object-verb agreement, indicating a possible flaw in the model's syntactic ability. |
Linguistic Frameworks Go Toe-to-Toe at Neuro-Symbolic Language Modeling (2022.naacl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing models of language understanding are based on explicit representations of hierarchical structure, but there are good reasons to doubt that they can be said to understand language in any meaningful way. |
| Approach: | They examine whether syntactic and semantic graph representations can complement and improve neural language modeling. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms pretrained models on English WSJ in perplexity and other metrics. |
LSTMs Compose—and Learn—Bottom-Up (2020.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent work in NLP shows that LSTMs capture compositional structure in language data. |
| Approach: | They propose to measure the decompositional interdependence between word meanings in an LSTM based on their gate interactions. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can model syntactic relationships rather than learning the longer-range relations independently. |