Neural language models as psycholinguistic subjects: Representations of syntactic state (N19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a recent study examines the extent to which neural network language models reflect incremental representations of syntactic state . we examine neural network model behavior on sentences chosen to probe specific aspects of the learned representations . |
| Approach: | They employ experimental methodologies developed in psycholinguistics to study syntactic representation in the human mind. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models are trained on large datasets and only sensitive to subtle cues . the results raise questions about the accuracy of the models and their performance . |
Similar Papers
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. |
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. |
From Language to Language-ish: How Brain-Like is an LSTM’s Representation of Nonsensical Language Stimuli? (2020.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | LSTMs are often used to measure event related potentials, but are they able to generalize to new data in a human-like way? |
| Approach: | They asked whether an LSTM model represents a language sample with degraded semantic or syntactic information and whether it resembles the brain's reaction to the stimuli. |
| Outcome: | The results suggest that LSTMs and human brain handle nonsensical data similarly. |
Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Models (D18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances have led to an explosion of neural network-based LM architectures. |
| Approach: | They propose to supplement perplexity with a metric that assesses whether a language model can predict the grammatical sentence more accurately than an ungrammatically-based model. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model performed poorly on many of the constructions. |
RNN Simulations of Grammaticality Judgments on Long-distance Dependencies (C18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | LSTM networks can detect linguistic structures which are ungrammatical due to extraction violations, but are sensitive to linguistic processing factors. |
| Approach: | They propose to use LSTM networks to detect ungrammatical sentences by detecting extra arguments and subject-relative clause island violations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can correctly classify (un)grammatical sentences, in certain conditions, but is sensitive to linguistic processing factors and unable to induce a more abstract notion of grammaticality. |
Implicit Representations of Meaning in Neural Language Models (2021.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Neural language models (NLMs) encode lexical relations and syntactic structure, but their effectiveness is still unclear. |
| Approach: | They propose to use text as a model to model entities and situations as they evolve throughout a discourse. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models have functional similarities to linguistic models of dynamic semantics and can be learned with only text as training data. |
Pre-trained language model representations for language generation (N19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Pre-trained language model representations have been successful in a wide range of language understanding tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to use pre-trained language model representations to integrate them into sequence to sequence models and apply it to machine translation and abstractive summarization. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model is able to perform 5.3 BLEU in machine translation and 5.3 on the full text version of CNN/DailyMail. |
On Efficiently Representing Regular Languages as RNNs (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent work by Hewitt et al. (2020) provides an interpretation of the empirical success of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) as language models (LMs). |
| Approach: | They generalize their construction and show that RNNs can efficiently represent a larger class of LMs than previously claimed. |
| Outcome: | The results suggest that RNNs can represent a larger class of LMs than previously claimed . |
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. |
A Systematic Assessment of Syntactic Generalization in Neural Language Models (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work on syntactic knowledge models has not provided a clear picture of the properties required to produce proper syntaktic generalizations. |
| Approach: | They propose to evaluate syntactic knowledge of language models by varying model architectures . they find substantial differences in syntaktic generalization performance by model architecture . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model architectures outperform other architectures on a set of 34 English-language syntactic test suites. |