Apr 2025· Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society· Vol 10, pp. 923 - 950· 1 citation· 160 references
Computer ScienceMedicine
Abstract
Abstract Language models (LMs) are commonly criticized for not “understanding” language. However, many critiques focus on cognitive abilities that, in humans, are distinct from language processing. Here, we instead study a kind of understanding tightly linked to language: inferring “who did what to whom” (thematic roles) in a sentence. Does the central training objective of LMs—word prediction—result in sentence representations that capture thematic roles? In two experiments, we characterized sentence representations in four LMs that have been proposed as models of human language processing. The overall representational similarity of sentence pairs did not reflect whether they had the same agent/patient assignments or opposite agent/patient assignments. Furthermore, we found limited evidence that thematic role information was available in any subspace of hidden activations. However, some attention heads robustly captured thematic roles, independently of syntax. Therefore, LMs can extract thematic roles but this information influences their representations weakly.
Analysis of internal representations indicate that language models process unlike coordination by treating the conjoined elements as belonging to similar structural categories or through a mechanism akin to deletion, both of which appear learnable from exposure to alike coordination alone.
The central contributions of this paper articulate the conditions under which distributional predictability threatens the internal validity of an experiment and provide concrete recommendations for how to control for this potential confound.
Sean Trott, James A. Michaelov, Cameron R. Jones et al.· Open Mind· 0 citations
Abstract This study investigates how nonexperts conceptualize linguistics and what they most want to know about language. We recruited 812 English-speaking participants from Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom via Prolific to complete four open-ended surveys (N = 406 on perceived professional foci; N = 40...
Victor Kuperman, Gary Libben· Linguistics Vanguard· 0 citations
This work treats the sender's communicative intent, the Gricean what-was-meant, as a first-class interpretability object, and shows the failure is one of readout on top of a robust representation.
A multimodal gap is revealed in how foundation models express meaning, and how their understanding may not transfer faithfully nor equally across modalities.
Jasin Cekinmez, Addison J. Wu, Raja Marjieh et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.